In this bail application, the High Court of Delhi granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner facing charges of trespass and forgery. The court imposed the condition of furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 10,000 with one surety.
Petitioner released on anticipatory bail subject to furnishing a personal bond of `10,000 with one surety.
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.
$~23
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SATISH BHASKAR
..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Santosh Singh Bagga, Adv.
Versus
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through Mr. M.S. Oberoi, APP with SI Md. Imteayaz Alam, P.S. Shahbad Dairy
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK
O R D E R % 04.01.2018
Crl. M.A. no.119/2018 (exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application is disposed of.
BAIL APPLN. 19/2018
FIR No. 222/2017 under Sections 442/448/451/452/506/34 IPC was registered at Police Station Shahbad Dairy, pursuant to the directions of learned Metropolitan Magistrate passed under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. Complainant alleged in the FIR that she had purchased the property nos. 212-213, Sector 25, Pocket 5, Rohini, New Delhi vide registered transfer
documents dated 3rd October, 2008 from Shri Pawan Kumar Aggarwal. In the month of November, 2015 when she visited the property, she found that locks were broken and changed. Neighbours informed that petitioner and his co-accused had trespassed the property on 23rd November, 2015. She lodged DD No. 49B at police station on 23rd November, 2015. When she returned from the police station, petitioner and his co-accused were found standing outside the said property. They were armed with knife, stick and iron rods. Petitioner and co-accused had trespassed the property.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is son of the co-accused Amar Nath Bhaskar, who had taken the property on rent from the complainant in the year 2013. Thereafter, co-accused started living in the said property. Petitioner’s father Amar Nath Bhaskar even got a gas connection at the aforesaid property right from 2013. Petitioner is living with his father in the said property right since 2013. Co-accused Amar Nath Bhaskar has already been granted bail.
Keeping in mind the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, it is ordered that in case of arrest, petitioner be released on anticipatory bail subject to his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of ` 10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of
the Investigating Officer/Arresting Officer/SHO concerned.
Bail application is disposed of in the above terms.
Dasti.
A.K. PATHAK, J.
JANUARY 04, 2018 r.bararia
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be granted anticipatory bail in a case regarding trespass and possession dispute.
Whether the conditions precedent for granting bail have been satisfied in the present circumstances.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
SATISH BHASKAR
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI
A.K. PATHAK
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
