Allowed

Rohit Sharma @ Toni v. State (Nct of Delhi)

Delhi HC9 Nov 2017BAIL APPLN./2278/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted interim bail to a petitioner in custody for 7 days to enable him to attend his cousin's marriage, despite his history of seeking interim bail, noting only three witnesses had been examined in his case.

What did the court decide?

Interim bail granted for a period of 7 days upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- with one surety, subject to specific conditions including not leaving Delhi without intimation.

Rohit Sharma @ Toni Vs State (Nct of Delhi) — Service and Employment | Delhi HC (2017)

¶1

$~47

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- BAIL APPLN. 2278/2017

¶4

ROHIT SHARMA @ TONI ..... Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Sunil Tiwari, Advocate.

¶6

versus

¶7

STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Neelam Sharma, APP for State. SI Dharmendra Pratap Singh, PS Samaipur Badli.

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR O R D E R % 09.11.2017

¶9

Crl.M.A.18340/2017 (Exemption)

¶10

Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions.

¶11

Application stands disposed of.

¶12

BAIL APPLN. 2278/2017

¶13

The petitioner, who is in custody since 05.08.2014 and is facing trial for offences under Sections 498A, 304B and 34 of the IPC has sought interim bail so as to enable him to attend the marriage of his sister (cousin) which is scheduled on 11.11.2017.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this court to the order dated 06.11.2017 passed by the court below whereby his prayer for interim bail was rejected, perhaps, on the ground that earlier also he was granted interim bail and the court below was of the view that the petitioner

¶15

had made it a habit of approaching the court for interim bail.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the factum of marriage of his cousin on 11.11.2017 has already been verified by the trial court.

¶17

Taking into account the fact that the petitioner has been in custody since 05.08.2014 and uptil now only 3 witnesses have been examined, this court is inclined to grant interim bail to the petitioner for a period of 7 days.

¶18

The petitioner is directed to be released on interim bail for 7 days, to be counted from the date of his release, on his furnishing bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

¶19

The petitioner shall, however, abide by the conditions listed below:-

¶20

a) The petitioner shall surrender before the jail authorities on or before the expiry of the said period of interim bail.

¶21

b) The petitioner shall not engage himself in any unlawful activity.

¶22

c) The petitioner would not leave, under any circumstance, the National Capital Region of Delhi, without intimating the officerin-charge of the concerned police station.

¶23

d) He shall furnish his and his surety’s mobile telephone numbers to the SHO of the concerned police station so that in case of necessity he could be tracked and his whereabouts could be ascertained.

¶24

In case, the petitioner flouts any one of the conditions, an application

¶25

could be moved by the SHO for cancellation of his interim bail and for taking of coercive steps for securing his attendance.

¶26

With these observations, the petition is disposed of.

¶27

The order be communicated to the Superintendent of the concerned

¶28

jail for compliance and record.

¶29

A copy of the order be given dasti under the signature of the Court

¶30

Master.

¶31

ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J

¶32

NOVEMBER 09, 2017 ns

Rohit Sharma @ Toni v. State (Nct of Delhi)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohit Sharma @ Toni v. State (Nct of Delhi)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajipal Vs Dayabir Bainsla

Gaurav Rodiwal & Ors. Vs the State & Anr.

Manish Mishra & Ors. Vs the State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Urmila Devi Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Vikas Gaur & Ors. Vs State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Naveen Rana & Ors. Vs State & Anr.