Raman Sharma v. State (Govt. Of NCT Of Delhi)
$~52 *
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ BAIL APPLN. 2508/2024, CRL.M.A. 20984/2024 RAMAN SHARMA .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Ajay Kmar Pipaniya, M.r Paras Punyani, Mr. Deepak Matur and Mr.
Lavish Chhikara, Advocates.
versus STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through:
Mr. Hemant Mehla, Ld. APP for State with ASI Shiv Lal, P.S. Sultan Puri
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
O R D E R
% 22.07.2024 CRL.M.A. 20985/2024 (Seeking Exemption) 1.
Allowed, subject to just exceptions.
2.
The application is accordingly disposed of.
BAIL APPLN. 2508/2024 3.
A petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C read with Section 482 Cr.P.C has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for grant of Anticipatory Bail in FIR No.438/2024 under Section 308/323/341/379/34 IPC registered at P.S. Sultanpuri, Delhi.
4.
It is submitted in the application that on 11.05.2024 the complainant along with her relative and family members attacked the house of the petitioner and this FIR as well the counter FIR has been registered against The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
the applicant as well the family members of the complainant. 5.
It is submitted that the petitioner's sister Rinku @ Rinkal got married to the son of the complainant on 04.12.2020. It was a love marriage which was performed clandestinely by the two without informing the family of the accused as well as the complainant. It is submitted that the petitioner and his family as well the as the complainant family reside in the same locality at 50 metre away. The petitioner is a young boy of 22 years and is a UPSC aspirant and other competitive exams.
6.
It is claimed that the relationship between the petitioner's family and the family of the complainant were sour due to the marriage of the sister of the petitioner with the son of the complainant. The petitioner is having a good educational background. It is submitted that after the registration of FIR, Notice under Section 41 Cr.P.C was served upon the petitioner. It is claimed that he has been made a scapegoat of the matrimonial dispute between his sister and brother-in-law.
7.
It is further asserted that no Notice under Section 41A Cr.P.C was served by the Police Officers. He has sought Anticipatory Bail before the learned ASJ, wherein he was got protection against the coercive action and he has already joined the investigations.
He has submitted that CCTV Camera footage of the incident and has also submitted the clothes that he was wearing. The only ground on which the bail is being opposed is that the weapon of offence has to be recovered, but all other accused have been admitted to regular bail, whose bail was also opposed on similar ground. The petitioner is willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed and that he may be granted bail.
8.
Learned Prosecutor has opposed the bail on the ground that the The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
weapon of offence has to be recovered and also that the injuries caused were grievous as it was a wound on the head which required 20 stitches and the injured remained in the ICU for 15 days.
It is further submitted that the NBWs have already been issued against the accused and the bail is strongly opposed.
9.
Submissions heard.
10.
As per the submissions made, the accused has joined investigations and has cooperated with the I.O. The other two accused have been admitted to regular bail, while Smt. Mamta ,mother of the petitioner has been granted Anticipatory Bail. Looking at the young age of the accused and also that he has cooperated in the investigation, it is directed that in the event of his arrest, the petitioner shall be released forthwith, with the following conditions:- a) The petitioner shall furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer/Arresting Officer.
b) The petitioner shall not contact, nor visit, nor offer any inducement, threat or promise to any of the prosecution witnesses or other persons acquainted with the facts of case. The petitioner shall not tamper with evidence nor otherwise indulge in any act or omission that is unlawful or that would prejudice the proceedings in the pending trial.
c) The applicant shall join the investigations as and when directed by the IO.
d) The applicant shall produce all the requisite information, documents in his power and possession, as and when directed by the The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
Investigating Officer.
11.
The Petition stands disposed of.
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J JULY 22, 2024/va The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.