Disposed

Suraj v. Sate (Gnctd)

Delhi HC5 Sept 2024BAIL APPLN./1844/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought anticipatory bail in a quarrel case where they allegedly unleashed their dog on the complainant; sections were added after a Section 164 statement. Noting they had joined investigation and were on interim protection, the court confirmed them on interim anticipatory bail on personal bonds and disposed of the applications.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners admitted to interim anticipatory bail on personal bond of Rs. 10,000 each with one like surety, subject to trial court conditions.

Suraj Vs Sate (Gnctd) — Anticipatory Bail | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~4&5

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- BAIL APPLN. 1844/2024 SURAJ .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Ekta Upadhyay, Adv. (VC) versus

¶4

SATE (GNCTD) .....Respondent Through: Mr. Raghuinder Verma, APP for the State with SI Amit Punia, Palam Village 5 + BAIL APPLN. 1848/2024 PRAVEEN .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Ekta Upadhyay, Adv. (VC) versus SATE (GNCTD) .....Respondent Through: Mr. Raghuinder Verma, APP for the State with SI Amit Punia, Palam Village

¶5

CORAM:

¶6

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SHARMA

¶7

O R D E R % 05.09.2024

¶8

The present applications have been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail in FIR no. 219/2024 under Section 323/289/509/452/34IPC, P.S. Palam Village.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner are joining the investigation in terms of the order dated 22.05.2022 and therefore, the interim protection granted to the petitioner may be continued.

¶10

Learned APP submits that initially the FIR was lodged under Section 322/289/34 IPC. However, subsequently on the basis of the statement under

¶11

This is a digitally signed order.

¶12

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 10/09/2024 at 12:10:02

¶13

Section 164 Cr.P.C., Section 509 and 452 IPC were also added. Learned counsel submits that the petitioners have joined the investigation, however, the case is serious in nature and therefore, may not be admitted to the bail.

¶14

The FIR indicates that the parties are related to each other and allegedly the accused persons unleashed their dog on the complainant. This led to the quarrel between both the parties.

¶15

I have considered that taking into submissions the petitioners are admitted on interim anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 10,000/- each with one surety of the like amounts subject to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court subject to the conditions imposed by the learned Trial Court.

¶16

In view of the above, the present applications stand disposed of.

¶17

DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J

¶18

SEPTEMBER 5, 2024/ JN/DG..

¶19

This is a digitally signed order.

¶20

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 10/09/2024 at 12:10:02

Suraj v. Sate (Gnctd)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suraj v. Sate (Gnctd)

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

Sonia Aggarwal Vs State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)

Dr. Anoop Kumar Gupta & Anr. Vs State NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Anshul Aggarwal Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Abbas Vs State

Pradeep (Husband) & Ors. Vs the State (G.N.C.T. of Delhi) & Anr.

Sumit Chauhan & Ors. Vs State NCT of Delhi and Anr.