Arvind @ Rajju v. State

$~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 738/2018 & CRL.M.A. 6116/2018 ARVIND @ RAJJU ..... Petitioner Through Counsel for the petitioner (appearance not given) versus STATE ..... Respondent Through Mr. Kamal Kr. Ghei, APP for State

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ANU MALHOTRA

O R D E R

% 31.05.2018 Status report is on the record. The Investigation Officer with the case diary is present.

On behalf of the applicant, it has been submitted that he has been falsely implicated in the instant case contending that apart from the alleged instigation to the other co-accused to assault the deceased Vishal, there is no other allegation against him, which is refuted on behalf of the State submitting to the effect that the statement under Section 161 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 of the witness Aman categorically indicates that the applicant along with the other co-accused Dharampal @ Jugaad had even surrounded them when they went forward to reach the spot where the present Vishal was being assaulted and the brother of the Aman was also assaulted with a knife.

It has also been submitted on behalf of the State that the status report submitted indicates that there are previous antecedents also against the BAIL APPLN. 738/2018

applicant with the alleged commission of the offences punishable under Sections 307/324/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in relation to the FIR No. 229/15 PS Chanakya Puri, New Delhi. Despite submissions made on behalf of the applicant that the same would have no relevance, the previous adverse antecedents against the applicant cannot be overlooked in view of the allegations made against the applicant. The application is declined. ANU MALHOTRA, J MAY 31, 2018/MK BAIL APPLN. 738/2018