Dismissed

Rahul Kumar Pal v. State Gnct of Delhi

Delhi HC24 Sept 2024BAIL APPLN./1492/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge order dismissing a bail application filed under Sections 439 and 482 Cr.P.C. for a constable accused of robbery. The court dismissed the application citing the gravity of the offence and the fact that material prosecution witnesses have not yet been examined.

What did the court decide?

Bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. dismissed.

Rahul Kumar Pal Vs State Gnct of Delhi — Bail and Remand | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~5

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- BAIL APPLN. 1492/2024

¶4

RAHUL KUMAR PAL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Randheer Singh, Advocate.

¶5

versus

¶6

STATE GNCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Ms. Richa Dhawan, APP for the State along with SI Prashant, Special Staff/North.

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA

¶8

¶9

O R D E R 24.09.2024

¶10

Bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C read with Section 482 Cr.P.C has been filed for grant of regular bail in FIR No.111/2022 dated 04.04.2022 under Sections 365/395/342/170 IPC P.S.Lahori Gate.

¶11

It is submitted that the accused has been implicated falsely in this case. His first bail application has already been dismissed by the learned ASJ. The complainant initially registered e-FIR for theft of Rs.10 lakhs but subsequently concocted the story and stated a different version in which he alleged the robbery amount of Rs.65 lakhs.

¶12

Charges have been framed against the petitioner. The complainant was partly examined but the testimony could not be concluded. PW-2 has also been partly examined. It is further

¶13

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/09/2024 at 12:49:53

¶14

submitted that there are material contradictions in the testimony of PW.1 & 2.

¶15

The co-accused has been subsequently arrested and a Supplementary Chargesheet has been filed in the Court on 31.10.2023. The Charges have been reframed on 13.03.2024 and the matter is again fixed for prosecution evidence and the witnesses have been recalled. The petitioner submitted that he is in judicial custody since 25.04.2022 and hence may be admitted to bail.

¶16

The State has submitted the Status Report wherein it is submitted that though initially the amount stated to have been robbed was Rs.10 lakhs but subsequently it has been found to be Rs.65 lakhs. The CCTV footage of the place of incident has been analysed and the complainant has identified the suspects and one white colour Mahindra Scorpio Car bearing Registration No.UP-80-DJ-0888 registered in the name of Raj Narayan Pratap Singh. His statement was recorded who stated that the accused Rahul Kumar Pal who is the Constable in UP Police, had taken away his vehicle on the alleged date and time.

¶17

The accused had surrendered before Jail Authority, Agra after commissioning present robbery while he was on bail in another robbery case registered vide FIR No.479/2018 under Section 392 IPC P.S.Hari Parvat, Agra, U.P. The accused was formally arrested in the present case on 25.04.2022. The Scorpio car used in the offence was recovered at the instance of accused while he was in Police Custody. However, the accused did not cooperate in recovery of the robbed money on the pretext that it was not shared and was in the possession

¶18

This is a digitally signed order.

¶19

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/09/2024 at 12:49:53

¶20

of co-accused Monu and Viresh who have also been arrested but they have refused to participate in TIP. The Bail Application is thus, opposed.

¶21

Learned counsel on behalf of the accused/Petitioner has clarified that the subsequent FIR had been arrested out of political rivalry as the petitioner was posted in the security of a MLA. The said matter has already been settled. Hence, the prayer is made for grant of bail.

¶22

8. Submissions Heard .

¶23

The allegations against the petitioner are that he being a Constable in U.P Police had abducted the complainant and committed robbery of Rs.65 lakhs. The entire incident was captured in the CCTV footage. The co-accused have been apprehended subsequently after they were declared P.O. The testimony of the public witnesses is yet to be concluded.

¶24

Considering the gravity of the offence and that the material prosecution witnesses are yet to be recorded, the Bail Application is hereby dismissed.

¶25

NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J

¶26

SEPTEMBER 24, 2024

¶27

¶28

This is a digitally signed order.

¶29

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/09/2024 at 12:49:53

Rahul Kumar Pal v. State Gnct of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Kumar Pal v. State Gnct 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

Dinesh Kumar Sachdeva Vs the State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Ors.

Smt Geeta Rani Vs State of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Yash Tandon Vs State of NCT Delhi

Rajender @ Rajesh and Ors. Vs the State of NCT of Delhi and Others

Mohd. Moeenul @ Mohin Vs State NCT of Delhi

Sanam Harjai Vs State NCT of Delhi and Anr.