Noman v. The State NCT Of Delhi

$~59 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ BAIL APPLN. 1467/2017 NOMAN ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr.Sameer Chandra, Adv. with Mr.Wiqar Ahmad and Mr.S.Pradhan, Advs.

versus THE STATE NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through:

Mr.Hirein Sharma, APP for State SI Sanjay Kaushik, PS-Sarai Rohilla

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA

O R D E R

% 31.07.2017 CRL.M.A.12192/2017 Exemption granted, subject to all just exceptions. Application stands disposed of.

BAIL APPLN. 1467/2017 This is an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking grant of regular bail in case FIR No.689/2016 under Sections 304-A/304/370/374/34 IPC, under Section 16 of Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, under Sections 3/14/16 of Child Labour (Prohibition and regulation) Act, 1986, under Sections 75/79 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, registered at Police Station-Sarai Rohilla, Delhi.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an innocent person and allegations alleged in the aforesaid FIR is false. He has further submitted that the petitioner did not commit any offence and there is

no cogent evidence against the petitioner. Counsel for the petitioner further submits that investigation has already been completed and the charge sheet has already been filed. He further submits that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 19.11.2016 and not required for further investigation in the present case. He has further submitted that trial is not likely to conclude in near future and the continued incarceration of the petitioner will not serve any purpose and prays that the petitioner be released on regular bail. On the other hand, learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the bail application and has submitted that the petitioner brought the deceased from his native village and got employed in the factory of coaccused Mohd. Shamim.

He has further submitted that the deceased became ill and was taken to hospital where he died during treatment. Looking in the above facts and circumstances, since the investigation has already been completed and the petitioner is stated to be in judicial custody since 19.11.2016, no purpose would be served if the petitioner is kept in judicial custody as the trial is likely to take some time, consequently, the petitioner is granted bail on his furnishing a bail bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Court below with the condition that he shall not influence the prosecution witnesses; he shall not tamper the prosecution evidence and he should not leave India without prior permission of the Court below. The present bail application is disposed of accordingly.

However, this order shall not affect the merit of the case. Copy of the order be given dasti, as prayed.

I.S.MEHTA, J JULY 31, 2017/sr