Diljit Singh v. The State

$~4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 5/2016 DILJIT SINGH ..... Petitioner Represented by:

Mr. Ajay Paul, Advocate.

Versus

THE STATE ..... Respondent Represented by:

Ms.Meenakshi Chauhan, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State with W/ASI Jyoti, P.S. Rajouri Garden.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT

O R D E R

% 04.01.2016 Crl. M.A. No.11/2016 (for exemption) Exemptions allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Accordingly, the application is allowed.

BAIL APPLN. 5/2016 1.

Vide the present petition, the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case bearing FIR No.614/2013 registered at Police Station Rajouri Garden, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A/406/34 IPC. 2.

For the aforesaid relief, the petitioner approached the Sessions Court vide Bail Application No.10177. While disposing of the same vide order dated 07.11.2015, the petitioner was admitted on bail, subject to condition that he shall deposit an amount of Rs.18,00,000/- (Eighteen Lacs) in the form of FDR in the name of the learned Trial Court within one month from the said date.

3.

Being aggrieved, the petitioner filed Crl.M.C.No.5015/2015 before this Court, which was disposed of vide order dated 11.12.2015 by setting aside the order dated 07.11.2015 and the petitioner was given liberty to take

appropriate steps before the appropriate Forum under the law. 4.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the learned Sessions Court admitted the petitioner on bail vide order dated 07.11.2015 subject to the condition noted above. He submits that since the said condition was not legally tenable, therefore, the same was challenged and this Court set aside the order dated 07.11.2015. 5.

It is an admitted fact that the chargesheet has already been filed against the petitioner. As stated by counsel for the petitioner, summons have not been issued against the petitioner as cognizance is yet to be taken. 6.

It is not in dispute that after passing the order dated 11.12.2015 by this Court, the petitioner neither taken steps before the Sessions Court nor the Trial Court for seeking bail.

7.

It is informed by the Investigating Officer of the case that the next date of hearing before the learned Trial Court is 02.02.2016, therefore, the petitioner shall appear before the concerned Court for bail and till then, no coercive steps shall be taken against him.

8.

I hereby make it clear that the observations made by this Court in this petition as well as the earlier petition being Crl.M.C. No.5015/2015 will have no bearing on the case of the petitioner and the learned Trial Court shall look into the matter afresh and pass appropriate order in accordance with law.

9.

With the above observations, the present petition is disposed of. SURESH KAIT, J.

JANUARY 04, 2016 Sb/jg