Partly allowed

Directorate of Enfocement v. Sunil Mangelal Agarwal

Delhi HC7 Oct 2024CRL.M.C./7446/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Director of Enforcement challenged the bail granted to the respondent but withdrew the prayer for cancellation of bail, pressing only for expunging remarks against the Investigating Officer. The respondent had no objection. The Court expunged the remarks and partly allowed the petition.

What did the court decide?

Remarks against the IO in paragraphs 43 to 45 of the impugned order expunged; petition partly allowed.

Directorate of Enfocement Vs Sunil Mangelal Agarwal — Bail and Remand | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~88

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 7446/2024

¶4

DIRECTORATE OF ENFOCEMENT .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Special Counsel for ED, Mr. Vivek Gurnani panel Counsel for ED, Mr Kunal Kochar Advocate, Mr. Sai Manik Sud, Advocates.

¶5

versus

¶6

SUNIL MANGELAL AGARWAL .....Respondent Through: Mr. Vaibhav Suri, Mr. Saud Khan, Mr. Shikhar Sharma, and Mr. R. Jude Rohit, Advocates.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH

¶9

O R D E R

¶10

% 07.10.2024

¶11

CRL.M.A. 28424/2024 (Exemption).

¶12

Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions.

¶13

The application stands disposed of.

¶14

CRL.M.C. 7446/2024 & CRL.M.A. 28423/2024 (Stay).

¶15

The instant petition under Section 483(3) read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (“BNSS” hereinafter) has been filed on behalf of the petitioner challenging the impugned order dated 31^st August, 2024 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge 06, Patiala House, District Court, New Delhi in IA No. 9/2024 in CC No. 112/2022 vide which the respondent/accused was granted bail.

¶16

Mr. Zoheb Hossain, learned special counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, on instructions, submitted that he is not pressing prayer “A”

¶17

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 02/07/2025 at 08:34:25

¶18

of the instant petition for cancellation of the bail which was granted to the respondent vide order dated 31^st August, 2024 passed by the learned ASJ. 5. It is submitted that the learned ASJ has made some observations/remarks against Mr. Mayank Arora, i.e., Investigating Officer (“IO” hereinafter) in paragraph nos. 43 to 45 of the impugned order and it is prayed that the same may be expunged on the basis of the grounds made in the instant petition from paragraph no. “V to AA”.

¶19

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, on instructions, submitted that he has no objection for expunging the remarks made against the IO by the learned ASJ while passing the impugned order. 7. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and perused the material available on record. 8. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, on instructions, has not pressed the instant petition qua prayer “A” for setting aside the impugned order passed by the learned ASJ while granting bail to the respondent, rather, he has only pressed for expunging the remarks made by the learned ASJ in paragraph nos. 43-45 of impugned order against the IO. 9. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, on instructions, has no objection to the prayer made on behalf of the learned special counsel appearing for the petitioner. 10. In view of the above facts and circumstances, and submissions made by the learned special counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as no objection given on behalf of the learned counsel for the respondent, the remarks made against the IO by the learned ASJ in paragraph nos. 43 to 45 of the impugned order are hereby expunged.

¶20

Accordingly, the instant petition is partly allowed to the aforesaid

¶21

¶22

extent and stands disposed of. Pending applications, if any, stands dismissed.

¶23

CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J

¶24

OCTOBER 7, 2024 rk/ryp

¶25

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

¶26

Directorate of Enfocement v. Sunil Mangelal Agarwal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Directorate of Enfocement v. Sunil Mangelal Agarwal

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

Janak Datwani Vs State

Din Dayal Agarwal Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Manish Jain and Ors. Vs State Govt of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Sikandar Khurshid Vs State Nct. of Delhi & Anr.

Veerpal Singh Vs the Commissioner Delhi Police & Anr.

Himanshu Dhingra Vs State NCT of Delhi and Anr.