Petitioner challenged the trial court order granting bail to his father-in-law in a matrimonial dispute case, alleging threats and offence severity. The High Court dismissed the petition, holding no interlocutory interference was warranted absent violations of bail conditions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~79
GURJEET SINGH .....Petitioner
Through: Ms. Nikita Sharma, Advocate (DHCLSC)
versus
THE STATE OF DELHI THROUGH S.H.O & ANR.
.....Respondents Through: Mr. Yudhvir Singh Chauhan, APP for the State. SI Dharmendra Sharma, PS Rajinder Nagar.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
O R D E R % 03.09.2024 CRL.M.A. 26542/2024 (Exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
CRL.M.C. 6949/2024
Page 1 of 4
CRL.M.C. 6949/2024
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 07/09/2024 at 14:26:17
that after the wife of the Petitioner left with her two children, two FIRs have been registered by him, one being FIR No.494/2019 registered at Police Station Tilak Nagar for offence under Section 324 IPC against the brotherin-law, who was arrested by the Police on 30.10.2023.
“I. He shall join the trial regularly;
II. He shall not tamper with the evidence and in case charge-sheet is filed against him, he shall regularly appear in the court during the trial;
III. He shall not contact the complainant, other witnesses and shall not pressurize them, induce them or extend any kind of threat to them; and
IV. In case of change of his address, he shall intimate the same to the SHO concerned and the court.”
Page 2 of 4
CRL.M.C. 6949/2024
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 07/09/2024 at 14:26:17
“ 4 . Rejection of bail in a non-bailable case at the initial stage and the cancellation of bail so granted, have to be considered and dealt with on different basis. Very cogent and overwhelming circumstances are necessary for an order directing the cancellation of the bail, already granted. Generally speaking, the grounds for cancellation of bail, broadly (illustrative and not exhaustive) are: interference or attempt to interfere with the due course of administration of justice or evasion or attempt to evade the due course of justice or abuse of the concession granted to the accused in any manner. The satisfaction of the court, on the basis of material placed on the record of the possibility of the accused absconding is yet another reason justifying the cancellation of bail. However, bail once granted should not be cancelled in a mechanical manner without considering whether any supervening circumstances have rendered it no longer conducive to a fair trial to allow the accused to retain his freedom by enjoying the concession of bail
Page 3 of 4
CRL.M.C. 6949/2024
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 07/09/2024 at 14:26:17
during the trial. These principles, it appears, were lost sight of by the High Court when it decided to cancel the bail, already granted. The High Court it appears to us overlooked the distinction of the factors relevant for rejecting bail in a non-bailable case in the first instance and the cancellation of bail already granted.” (emphasis supplied)
SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J
SEPTEMBER 3, 2024 hsk
Page 4 of 4
CRL.M.C. 6949/2024
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 07/09/2024 at 14:26:17
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the trial court order granting bail to the accused given the petitioner's allegations of threat and severity of the offence.
Whether the grant of bail was based on irrelevant or non-relevant considerations warranting cancellation.
Whether special circumstances exist to justify cancellation of bail pursuant to supreme court precedents.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dolat Ram & Ors. v. State of HaryanaReferred¶30
Dolat Ram & Ors. v. State of Haryana, 1995 (1) SCC 349 · Who else cites this
GURJEET SINGH
THE STATE OF DELHI
SUBRAMANIUM PRASAD
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
