The Delhi High Court disposed of a Criminal Misc. Case petition seeking modification of a ₹10 lakh fixed deposit condition imposed by the trial court. The petitioner offered alternative security via property title documents. The court directed the trial court to accept the undertaking.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: March 04, 2015
ANAND KUMAR VERMA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sumit Chaudhary, Mr. Anuj Arya & Mr. Ankit Goel, Advocates
versus
STATE & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Varun Goswami, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1-State with SI Ranvir Singh Mr. Suryakant Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
JUDGMENT
% (ORAL)
Vide impugned order of 3rd February, 2014, the learned trial court directed the petitioner to deposit indemnity bond in the sum of 10,00,000/- in the form of Fixed Deposit Receipt in the court with the rider that the said Fixed Deposit Receipt would be released to the complainant for encashment in case petitioner commits two consecutive defaults in appearance before the trial court. Modification of the aforesaid condition is sought in this petition on the ground that petitioner has no means to place on record the aforesaid Fixed Deposit Receipt of 10,00,000/-.
Crl.M.C.No.763/2014
Page 1
Learned counsel for petitioner on instructions submits that father of petitioner owns a house in Delhi, which is of much more value than 10,00,000/- and the title documents of the said property would be deposited with the trial court by petitioner’s father, who would stand surety of return of petitioner to face the trial in this FIR case and if for any reason, petitioner commits two consecutive defaults in appearance before the trial court, then the said property can be confiscated and after selling the said property, a sum of 10,00,000/- can be released therefrom to the complainant.
Let an undertaking in the aforesaid terms be furnished to the trial court along with original title documents and upon trial court being satisfied with the surety furnished, the condition of furnishing `10,00,000/- in the form of Fixed Deposit Receipt, be accordingly substituted by the trial court.
With aforesaid observations, this petition is disposed of. Dasti.
(SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE
MARCH 04, 2015 r
Crl.M.C.No.763/2014
Page 2
Anand Kumar Verma
State
Sunil Gaur
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
