Naseem Ahmed v. State

$~19 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 420/2016 NASEEM AHMED ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr.Shahid Azad & Ms.Meenu Sharma, Advs.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Through:

Mr.Kewal Singh Ahuja, APP for the State.

SI Pancham Kumar, PS Saket.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK

O R D E R

% 13.07.2016 Complainant Deepa Goyal lodged FIR No.1543/2015 under Section 384 IPC in the Police Station Saket stating therein that she had received a threatening message from mobile No.9582795772 on her mobile, to the effect that in case Rs.2 crores were not given, her child would be harmed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has been falsely implicated. He has nothing to do with the mobile number or the sim card from which the message was already sent. Learned APP submits that the sim card of mobile No. 9582795772 was purchased in the name of Tabrej Alam on fake voter ID card.

It is further submitted that this sim card was used in mobile

handset bearing IMEI Nos. 91446307044753 and 91446307044761 which was purchased by the petitioner from Kirpal Communication, representing himself as Pawan.

The box of mobile phone and cash memo/mobile bill bearing IMEI Nos. 91446307044753 and 91446307044761 was recovered from the house of the petitioner by the Investigating Officer. The mobile phone is yet to be recovered.

Learned APP further submits that the location of the mobile phone was traced to Main Road, Sant Nagar, Burari, Delhi-54 where petitioner is residing. Owner of Kirpal Communication namely Mohan has said that mobile phone was purchased by the petitioner by impersonating as Pawan. Further investigations are in progress.

Learned APP further submits that the petitioner's complicity is writ large from the material collected till now.

Custodial investigation is required.

Keeping in mind the above facts, I am not inclined to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to petitioner. Accordingly, the bail application is dismissed. A.K. PATHAK, J JULY 13, 2016 gm