Sameer v. State

$~38
* +	**IN THE HIGH ** BAIL APPLN. 66 SAMEER	**COURT ** /2018 Through: versus	OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ..... Petitioner Mr. Kapil Kaushik and Mr. Yogesh Swroop. Adv.
	STATE	Through:	..... Respondent Ms. Rajni Gupta, APP with SI Jasmer Singh, P.S. Jahangir Puri.
	CORAM: HON'BLE MR.	JUSTICE O R D E	A.K. PATHAK R
	%	10.01.201	8

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the FIR three

persons, had stolen the bag of the complainant after stopping his motorcycle. All the three accused have already been arrested. There is nothing against the petitioner. Initially FIR was registered under Section 379/34 IPC.

Learned APP submits that complainant had made a supplementary statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. on the same day stating therein that three boys, who intercepted his motorcycle, had shown him a katta and forcibly took away his bag. During the investigation it has been revealed from the disclosure statements of the co-accused that petitioner had conspired with them and had given a tip to them that victim will be carrying cash. Accordingly, offences under Sections 392/411/120B/34 IPC have been

added later on.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that except the disclosure statement of co-accused there is no other material has been collected against the petitioner, inasmuch as, petitioner was not present at the spot.