Mantosh v. State (NCT Of Delhi)
Y $-40-42 * .
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI^ AT NEW DELHI
BAIL APPLN.
670/2018 + ANIL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Prashant Mendiratta, Adv.
versus STATE(NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through:
Dr. M.P. Singh, APP with SI Ashok Kumar, P.S. Chanakya Puri.
, AND"
BAIL APPLN. 67i/2018 + MANTOSH ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Prashant Mendiratta, Adv.
versus STATE (NOT OF DELHI) .... Respondent Through ' Dr. M.P. Singhj APP with SI Ashok Kumar, P.S. Chanakya Puri.
AND BAIL APPLN.
672/2018 +- KARTiK Petitioner Through Mr. Prashant Mendiratta, Adv.
versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) y* .....Respondent Through Mr. G.M. Farooqui, APP for State '
with SI Ashok Kumar, P.S. Chanakya Puri.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK %
ORDER
23.03.2018 Learned counseL for the petitioners submits that. petitioners are brothers. They had gone to Bangalore on 25^ January, 2018 iov Find Daan Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing.
of their father. All of them returned Delhi only on T February, 2018. (Boarding passes have been annexed with the application and originals of the same have been shown during the course of hearing). Learned counsel further submits that on V February, 2018, petitioners were not present in Delhi and been falsely implicated in this case, since petitioner-Kartik had lodged an FIR No.6/2015 under Section 7/8/13(l)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act against the SHO of police station Ambedkar Nagar. Learned AFP contends that on February, 2018, SI Bimal, Ct.
Pradeep Kumar, Ct. Vikas and HC Satish Kumar were on patrolling duty in the area around Basilsila in the Chirag Delhi at about 6:15 PM. When a secret informer met them and informed that petitioners were dealing in spurious liquor. He further informed that one boy Arjun would come to supply spurious liquor to petitioners at about 06:45 PM at Madangir, Dakshinpuri. Accordingly, raiding party of above officials was formed. One boy \yas seen coming on a scooty and on pointing of secret informer, the said boy (Arjun) was apprehended by the police. Arjun disclosed that he had come to supply the spurious liquor to the petitioners. That boy was in possession of large quantity of spurious liquor, which was seized. Arjun disclosed that he had brought the liquor to supply to petitioners.
I have considered the rival contentions of the parties and keeping in mind the totality of the facts and circumstances of this case, it is ordered that petitioners be released on bail in case of arrest, subject to their furnishing personal bonds in the sum of ?10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each with one surety each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer/Arresting Officer/SHO of the concerned police station.
the Investigating Officer as and when they are called upon to do so. Bail applications are disposed of in the above terms. Miscellaneous applications are disposed of as infiructuous. Dasti;
'
A.K.^ATHAK, J MARCH 23,2018 Pallavi