Garima v. State & Ors.
Case brief
What is this about?
Petitioner challenged bail granted to respondents under the SC/ST Act, alleging violation of the right to be heard. Court held that counsel's appearance satisfies procedural requirements and dismissed the petition.
What did the court decide?
Petition dismissed; impugned bail order upheld; no interference with the lower court's decision.
What the court decided
$~10
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 03rd December, 2024
+ CRL.M.C. 3291/2019
GARIMA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Satish Tamta, Senior Advocate with Mr. Shariq Iqbal and Ms. Manavi Josh, Advocates. versus STATE & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Manoj Pant, APP for the State with SI Sanjay Bansal, PS Bhajanpura. Mr. Shadman Ahmed Siddiqui and Ahmad Ammar, Advocates for R2 & R3.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN
AMIT MAHAJAN, J. (Oral)
- The present petition is filed impugning the order dated 06.07.2019 (hereafter ‘ the impugned order ’) passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (‘ ASJ ’), Karkardooma Courts, Delhi in Case No. 64/17, whereby and whereunder Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 were released on bail in connection with FIR No. 373/2016 registered with Police Station Bhajanpura for offences under Sections 323/504/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘ IPC ’) and Section 3(1)(r) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (‘ SC/ST Act ’).
Signature Not Verified2. Briefly stated, the FIR was registered based on the
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail granted without the complainant's personal presence is illegal under Section 3(1)(r) of the SC/ST Act when the complainant was represented by counsel.
Whether an appellate court can interfere with a bail order on the ground of procedural irregularity if no mismanagement of bail or violation of conditions is shown.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Garima
- respondent
State & Ors.
Coram
Amit Mahajan
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court