Mohd. Gulam Shahid v. State

$~26 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ BAIL APPLN. 2173/2018 & CRL.M.A. 32223/2018 MOHD. GULAM SHAHID ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. M. Shamikh, Advocate [ versus STATE ..... Respondent Through:

Mr.Akshai Malik, APP for the State.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA

O R D E R

% 17.09.2018 The issue as to whether the role of the petitioner can be said to be restricted to the offence under Section 21 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 or goes beyond to the extent of abetment of main offences will have to be examined in light of the statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C. of at least three witnesses, they being Naseem Akhtar son of Mohd. Hakimuddin; Majlis @ Muzamil Hussain, son of Mohd. Minhaz and Wasim, son of Abdul Rahim, which have been referred by the learned prosecutor.

After some hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, seeks permission to withdraw the bail application seeking liberty to move a fresh application for bail before the trial court after charge has been framed.

The bail application along with accompanying application are dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for, granted. Dasti under the signatures of Court Master.

R.K.GAUBA, J.

SEPTEMBER 17, 2018/nk