Allowed
Ajay & Anr. v. State (Nct of Delhi)
Delhi HCBAIL APPLN./1738/2016
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL…
What the court decided
AI extract
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.
$~8
AJAY & ANR
..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Akhand Pratap, Advocate versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI)
..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP with SI Dharmendra Pratap Singh, PS Samaipur Badli.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI
%
O R D E R 10.01.2017
Mr. Katyal states that the petitioner has joined the investigation as and when called for. The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 291/2016 registered under Sections 308/34 IPC at police station Samaipur Badli.
The submission of the petitioner is that as per the MLC, only simple injuries were allegedly suffered by one of the victims. In relation to the other victim, it is informed by Mr. Katyal that the report is still pending. The co-accused Ravi has been released on regular bail.
Since the petitioner has joined the investigation, I am inclined to allow the present application. Accordingly, it is directed that in case of his
arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail upon his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer. This is further subject to the condition that the petitioner shall join the investigation as and when called for. He shall not indulge in any criminal activity while on bail. He shall not seek to influence any of the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the prosecution evidence.
The bail application stands disposed of. Dasti.
VIPIN SANGHI, J
JANUARY 10, 2017 sl
AJAY & ANR
STATE (NCT OF DELHI)
VIPIN SANGHI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court