Shyam Kumar Singh v. State

$~41 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ BAIL APPLN. 1053/2018 SHYAM KUMAR SINGH ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Kedar Yadav, Adv.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Through:

Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APP for State with SI Rajiv Singh, HC Amit Kumar, P.S. Mehrauli.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK

O R D E R

% 08.05.2018 Crl. M.A. 8667/2018 Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

Application is disposed of.

Bail Appln. 1053/2018 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is not the owner of Santro Car bearing registration no. DL 3 CAJ 3354 from which alleged illegal liquor was recovered.

Petitioner was not even driving the said car.

Petitioner has nothing to do with the said car and the liquor. Petitioner has already joined the investigation after he was granted interim protection by the trial court.

Learned APP has opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the

petitioner.

It is submitted that petitioner is a habitual offender. He is involved in six other similar cases. Petitioner is B.C. of the area. Enquiry was made from the concerned RTO when it was revealed that petitioner had purchased aforesaid Santro car from one Mr. Parveen Kumar Gupta. Statement of Mr. Parveen Kumar Gupta has also been recorded in this regard.

Keeping in mind the facts and circumstances of this case, I am of the view that no case is made out to grant benefit of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Bail application is dismissed.

A.K. PATHAK, J.

MAY 08, 2018 ga