Tarun Vincent Daniel v. State (NCT Of Delhi)

$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 3114/2024 TARUN VINCENT DANIEL .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. K.K. Manan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Nishant Rana, Ms. Uditi Bali, Mr.

Aman Goyal, Mr. Adarsh Shandilya, Mr. Akshay Daniel, Mr. Pappu Salman, Mr. Lavish Chandra, Mr.

Karmanya Singh Choudhary, Mr.

Ritik, Mr. Siddharth Choudhary and Ms. Sunita Sethi, Advocates.

versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through:

Mr. Laksh Khanna, APP for State with Inspector Ashok Kumar PS Crime Branch, Delhi.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI % 05.09.2024

O R D E R

1.

By way of present bail application, the applicant seeks regular bail in FIR No. 141/2024 registered under Sections 316(5)/61(2) BNS, 2023, at Police Station Crime Branch, Delhi.

2.

Mr. K.K. Manan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the applicant, submits that the applicant is in custody since 18.07.2024. It is further submitted that as per the prosecution case, the applicant had provided the requisite CDR to the decoy customer sent by the police officials. It is also submitted that even as per the prosecution case, it was the co-accused, namely Sanjay Kumar, who had provided more than 10 CDRs and 25 mobile locations to the applicant. Learned counsel further states that the The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

applicant is aged around 60 years.

3.

The bail application is opposed by learned APP for the State by contending that the present case came to be registered on receiving secret information that some persons were indulging in buying/selling of CDRs of the general public in an unauthorized manner. He submits that a decoy customer was sent to the present applicant and a sum of Rs.29,000/- was also transferred to the applicant's Paytm wallet, against which the applicant transferred the CDRs to the decoy customer. The said information was procured from the other co-accused, Sanjay Kumar, who stated himself to be working with Vodafone/Idea. The co-accused had provided the applicant with more than 10 CDRs of different numbers and 25 mobile locations, despite most of the chats between them being deleted. It is further stated that the applicant is also involved in another case being FIR No.308/2014 registered under Section 307 IPC.

4.

At this stage, learned Senior Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is already on bail in the aforesaid case. 5.

Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances and the further fact that the co-accused, from whom the information is statedly procured, has already been granted interim protection, it is directed that the applicant be released on regular bail subject to him furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Jail Superintendent/concerned Court/Duty J.M. and subject to the following further conditions :- i) The applicant shall not leave the NCR without prior permission of the concerned Court.

ii) The applicant shall provide his mobile number to the Investigating The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

Officer on which he will remain available during the pendency of the trial. iii) In case of change of residential address or contact details, the applicant shall promptly inform the same to the concerned Investigating Officer as well as to the concerned Court.

iv) The applicant shall not directly/indirectly try to get in touch with the complainant or any other prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence. v) The applicant shall regularly appear before the concerned Court during the pendency of the trial.

6.

The bail application is disposed of in the above terms. 7.

Copy of the order be communicated to the concerned Jail Superintendent electronically for information. 8.

Copy of the order be uploaded on the website forthwith. 9.

Needless to state that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and have made the observations only with regard to present bail applicant and nothing observed hereinabove shall amount to an expression on the merits of the case and shall not have a bearing on the trial of the case as the same has been expressed only for the purpose of the disposal of the present bail application.

DASTI MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J SEPTEMBER 5, 2024/rd The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.