Luvkush Alias Golu v. State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Delhi HC7 Mar 2025BAIL APPLN./4732/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail allowed; Delhi High Court; BAIL APPLN. 4732/2024; FIR No. 0347/2024 PS Karawal Nagar; Sections 333, 115(2), 3(5) BNS; Article 20(3) Constitution self-incrimination; Bijender v. State of Haryana SLP(Crl.) 1079/2024; simple injuries; Rs. 10,000/- bond; Jasmeet Singh J; 07.03.2025.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail: in the event of arrest, petitioner to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with one surety of Rs. 10,000/- each to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer, subject to conditions (operational mobile number during trial; informing IO of current address and any change thereof; joining investigation as and when asked; no direct or indirect contact with complainant/prosecution witnesses or tampering with evidence; regular appearance before the trial Court). ¶¶25

Luvkush Alias Golu Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Ors. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶25

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in FIR No. 0347/2024 registered at PS Karawal Nagar under Sections 333, 115(2) and 3(5) of BNS. +1 more

¶¶7

Court's answer

The nature of injuries suffered by the complainant was opined to be simple in nature, a material consideration in favour of granting bail.

¶¶15

Ratio / Principle

Article 20(3) of the Constitution of India embodies the principle of protection against compulsion of self-incrimination; the accused is only required to answer as per his personal knowledge and cannot be compelled to give answers as per the wishes of the prosecution.

¶¶19

Key takeaways

The petition is allowed: in the event of arrest, the petitioner is to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with one surety of Rs. 10,000/- each to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer, subject to the enumerated conditions (operational mobile number, address disclosure and updates, joining investigation as and when asked, no contact with complainant/prosecution witnesses or tampering with evidence, regular appearance before the trial Court).ratio¶¶25
Nothing observed in the order shall amount to an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.obiter¶¶32

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail granted (Jasmeet Singh, J., Delhi HC, 07.03.2025) to petitioner in FIR No. 0347/2024 dated 17.10.2024, PS Karawal Nagar, under Sections 333, 115(2) and 3(5) of BNS, arising from an alleged assault with a bottle on the complainant on 14.10.2024. Injuries were opined to be simple in nature; petitioner had joined investigation pursuant to interim protection ordered on 13.01.2025 and had no other criminal antecedents. The APP's objection that the petitioner was not disclosing the names of co-accused persons and the weapon (bottle) was unrecovered was met by the settled proposition that Article 20(3) of the Constitution protects against compulsion of self-incrimination, the accused answering only as per his personal knowledge, for which the Court relied on the Supreme Court's order in Bijender v. State of Haryana, SLP(Crl.)No.1079/2024 (order dated 06.03.2024). Bail directed in the event of arrest on a personal bond with one surety of Rs. 10,000/- each to the IO's satisfaction, with conditions including an operational mobile number, address disclosures, joining investigation as required, no contact with the complainant or witnesses, no tampering with evidence, and regular trial-court appearance. Observations not to be read as opinion on merits; petition disposed of accordingly.

¶1

$~2

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- BAIL APPLN. 4732/2024 LUVKUSH ALIAS GOLU .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Adv. versus

¶4

STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondent Through: Ms. Priyanka Dalal, APP SI Subah Singh, PS Karawal Nagar

¶5

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH O R D E R % 07.03.2025

¶6

CRL.M.(BAIL) 2191/2024

¶7

This is a petition seeking a grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No. 0347/2024 dated 17.10.2024 registered at PS Karawal Nagar, North East District, Delhi 110094 under Sections 333, 115(2) and 3(5) of BNS.

¶8

The brief facts of the case as per the said FIR are that on 14.10.2024, the petitioner alongwith his friends entered the office of the complainant and hit him with a bottle on his head. Thereafter, they fled from the place of the alleged incident.

¶9

On 17.10.2024, the present FIR was registered by the complainant.

¶10

Vide the order dated 13.01.2025 passed by this Court, the petitioner was granted the interim protection in the present case.

¶11

Mr. Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, states that pursuant to the said order, the petitioner has joined the investigation.

¶12

In the present case, the nature of injuries suffered by the complainant is

¶13

This is a digitally signed order.

¶14

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 12/03/2025 at 11:45:14

¶15

opined to be simple in nature.

¶16

The petitioner has no other criminal antecedents and this is the only case registered against the petitioner.

¶17

Additionally, the petitioner has old aged parents, a wife and a minor child and is the sole bread earner of his family.

¶18

Ms. Dalal, learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent, states that the petitioner is not cooperating in the investigation as he is not disclosing the name of the co-accused persons and the weapon of the alleged offence (bottle) is yet to be recovered.

¶19

It is a settled proposition of law that Article 20(3) of the Constitution of India embodies the principle of protection against compulsion of self-incrimination. The accused is only required to answer as per his personal knowledge and he cannot be compelled to give answers as per the wishes of the prosecution. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, while deciding upon an anticipatory bail, in the case of Bijender v. State of Haryana, SLP(Crl.)No.1079/2024, order dated 06.03.2024 , observed as under:-

¶20

“An accused, while joining investigation as a condition for remaining enlarged on bail, is not expected to make self-incriminating statements under the threat that the State shall seek withdrawal of such interim protection.”

¶21

It is further stated by the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in the present case by Mr. Anil, his neighbour who is also the landlord of the complainant. It is stated that Anil was in contact with the IO even prior to the incident. The call details of Anil and IO are annexed with the petition.

¶22

This is a digitally signed order.

¶23

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 12/03/2025 at 11:45:14

¶24

It is also pertinent to note that there is a delay in the investigation as the IO himself sought time before the learned Session Judge for submitting the medical opinion from the concerned doctor qua the injury sustained by the complainant and was granted time to file the same. However, the IO failed to do so as the complainant refused to join the investigation citing that he is unwell.

¶25

Keeping in view the aforesaid facts of the present case, the petition is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest, the petitioner be released on bail subject to his furnishing a personal bond with one surety in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- each to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer (IO) and also subject to the following terms and conditions:-

¶26

i. At the time of furnishing bail bond, the petitioner shall provide the mobile number, which he undertakes to keep operational at all times during the pendency of the trial;

¶27

ii. The petitioner shall inform the concerned IO about his current residential address;

¶28

iii. In case of change of residential addresses/contact details, the petitioner shall promptly inform the concerned IO/SHO;

¶29

iv. The petitioner shall join the investigation as and when asked;

¶30

v. The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly try to get in touch with the complainant or any other prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence;

¶31

vi. The petitioner shall regularly appear before the trial Court.

¶32

Nothing observed hereinabove shall amount to an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

¶33

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 12/03/2025 at 11:45:14

¶34

The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶35

Status report handed over in Court today is taken on record.

¶36

JASMEET SINGH, J

¶37

MARCH 7, 2025/sp

¶38

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

¶39

This is a digitally signed order.

¶40

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 12/03/2025 at 11:45:14

Luvkush Alias Golu v. State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Luvkush Alias Golu v. State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vinod Bansal Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Anshu Agarwal Vs State and Anr.

Subhash Chand Taneja Vs Ravi Bhandari

Parminder Alias Babbal Vs State Govt. of Nct, Delhi

Rachide Omar Suete Vs Customs

Mohd Aurangzeb Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi