Allowed

Yogesh @ Tunda v. State (Govt. of N.C.T. Delhi)

Delhi HC5 Mar 2024BAIL APPLN./622/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Delhi High Court allowed an application for short-duration custody bail for six hours. The applicant, an under-trial prisoner in an organised crime case, sought to marry. The court allowed the bail subject to rigorous security measures and specific directions regarding the venue and travel. Relief

What did the court decide?

Custody bail allowed for six hours between 08.03.2024 to 15.02.2024 (likely a typo in text, intended 15.02.2024 or next day) for marriage, subject to security arrangements and immediate return to jail

Yogesh @ Tunda Vs State (Govt. of N.C.T. Delhi) — Bail and Remand | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~87

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

+ BAIL APPLN. 622/2024
YOGESH @ TUNDA	..... Ap	plicant
Through:	Mr. Anuj Aggarwa	l, Mr.
	Virender Mual,	Mr.
	Abhishek K. Thaku	r, Mr.
	Manas Verma,	Mr.
	Pradeep Lamba,	Mr.
	Shubham Balu, Mr.	Aurag
	Andley, Mr.	Aditya
	Andley, Mr. Nikhil	Pawar,
	Ms. Shreya, Mr. Sid	dharth
	Nair & Mr. Kshitij	Arora,
	Advs.

¶4

versus

¶5

STATE (GOVT. OF N.C.T. DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Utkarsh, APP for the State Inspector Ashok, Special Cell, NDR

¶6

CORAM:

¶7

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN

¶8

O R D E R % 05.03.2024

¶9

CRL.M.A. 5477/2024 (for exemption)

¶10

Exemptions allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶11

The application stands disposed of.

¶12

BAIL APPLN. 622/2024

¶13

The present application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘ CrPC ’), inter alia , seeking custody bail in FIR No. 252/2018 dated 25.05.2018 registered at Police Station Alipur, for offences punishable under Section 3 of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 (hereafter

¶14

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 11/03/2024 at 11:17:18

¶15

‘MCOC Act’).

¶16

The learned Counsel for applicant submits that the applicant was arrested in the present case on 04.08.2018.

¶17

He submits that the applicant intends to marry a girl named ‘Neetu’ whom he had known for the last nine years. He submits that both are major and can give consent to the marriage.

¶18

He submits that the Neetu has paid an advance of Rs. 1100/- with the Arya Samaj Mandir Trust, located at 13/14, First floor opposite Gate No.6 back side Gokhale Market, Tis Ahzari Court, Delhi- 110054, for booking the same for the purpose of getting married.

¶19

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has opposed the present application on the ground that the applicant is under Trial in MCOC Act case, and is an active member of the organised crime syndicate with more than 60 cases pending against the syndicate.

¶20

He submits that the members of the crime syndicate have a record of escaping from police custody and the present applicant is also accused of committing a murder inside the jail premises. He submits that there is a strong apprehension that the applicant may attempt jumping the bail, as on an earlier occasion he had attempted to procure interim bail on the basis of forged documents.

¶21

The learned Trial Court had dismissed the bail application three counts, that is, first that the mother of the girl had not consented to the marriage; second that the applicant had forged COVID certificate of his father in order to procure interim bail; and third that more than 60 cases are registered against crime syndicate to which the petitioner is alleged to be a part of.

¶22

The girl Neetu is present in court and submits that she

¶23

¶24

intends to marry the present applicant. She also submits that she goes to meet the applicant in jail on a regular basis.

¶25

The status report handed over by the Respondent/State states that the factum of the marriage had been verified from the Arya Samaj Mandir.

¶26

Since the factum of the marriage is verified from the status report and the prospective wife of the applicant has also confirmed that she wants to get married to the applicant. However, keeping in mind the contention raised that the applicant is a high risk under trial prisoner, this court considers it apposite to put appropriate conditions and release the applicant, on humanitarian grounds, on custody bail for a period of six hours, on the following directions:

¶27

a. Considering the applicant is a high risk under trial prisoner the concerned jail superintendent is directed to make the necessary security arrangements;

¶28

b. The applicant will be released from jail in custody on any one day between 08.03.2024 – 15.02.2024, subject to putting in place proper security arrangements and prior verification of the venue by the jail superintendent, for a period of six hours including the travel time between the jail and the place of marriage, that is – Arya Samaj Mandir, located at 13/14, First floor opposite Gate No.6 back side Gokhale Market, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi110054; Or any other Arya Samaj Mandir which the Jail Superintendent feels safe to ensure the safety of the applicant as well as others;

¶29

c. The applicant shall be brought back to the jail directly after the marriage ceremony from the Arya Samaj Mandir.

¶30

Needless to state that all the expenses of the custody bail

¶31

¶32

will be borne out by the applicant.

¶33

The application is allowed in aforesaid terms.

¶34

A copy of this order be sent to the concerned jail superintendent.

¶35

AMIT MAHAJAN, J

¶36

MARCH 5, 2024 “SS”

¶37

This is a digitally signed order.

¶38

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 11/03/2024 at 11:17:18

Yogesh @ Tunda v. State (Govt. of N.C.T. Delhi)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yogesh @ Tunda v. State (Govt. of N.C.T. 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

Shri Sagar and Ors. Vs the State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Rohit Vs State NCT of Delhi

Vipin Jain Vs the State through SHO & Anr.

Dhamm Priya Bodh @ Dhamm Priya Bauddh and Ors. Vs the State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Prithvi Raj Kasana & Ors. Vs State

Vinay Kumar Walia Vs State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.