Sunny @ Kunal v. State
Case brief
What is this about?
This is an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The court granted bail to the petitioner, noting that he joined the investigation. Subsequent applications challenging interim protection were dismissed.
What did the court decide?
Petitioner granted anticipatory bail on ₹50,000 bail bond with one surety; directed to join investigation as required.
What the court decided
$~7
- IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
- BAIL APPLN. 490/2016
SUNNY @ KUNAL ..... Petitioner
Through : Mr.Ram Kumar, Advocate.
versus STATE ..... Respondent Through : Ms.Meenakshi Dahiya, APP with ASI Kiran Sethi. Ms.Shantha Devi Raman, Advocate for the complainant.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG O R D E R
% 05.09.2016
- The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in case FIR No.20/2016 registered under Sections 376/506 IPC at PS Anand Parbat. Status report is on record.
- I have heard the learned counsel for the parties including the counsel for the complainant and have examined the file. By an order dated 04.03.2016, the petitioner was granted interim protection and was directed to join the investigation as and when required. Subsequently, Crl.M.A.No.9489/2016 was filed on behalf of the complainant for withdrawal of the interim protection. Undisputedly, the petitioner has joined the investigation since then.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. given that he joined the investigation and the matter is related.
Whether the complaint must be withdrawn for the disposal of the bail application.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Sunny @ Kunal
- respondent
State
Coram
S.P. GARG
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court