Anil Alias Sonu Alias Matka vs State on 29 May, 2020

[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Anil Alias Sonu Alias Matka vs State on 29 May, 2020

Bench: Prateek Jalan

$~2
*       IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+       BAIL APPLN. 1061/2020

        ANIL alias SONU alias MATKA                 ..... Petitioner
                        Through: Ms. Shamshravish Rein, Advocate.

                                   versus

        STATE                                              ..... Respondent
                            Through:     Ms. Asha Tiwari, APP for the
                                         State.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN

                            ORDER

% 29.05.2020 CRL. M.A. 6961/2020(exemption) Exemption allowed, upon learned counsel for the petitioner undertaking to make good the defects within two weeks after the resumption of regular functioning of the Court.

The application stands disposed of.

BAIL APPLN. 1061/2020

1. The petitioner is undergoing trial in FIR No. 2288/2014 [P.S. - Shakarpur] under Sections 302/120B/34 IPC read with Section 25/27 of the Arms Act, 1959. He seeks interim bail for three months on the ground of hospitalisation of his wife.

2. It is stated that the petitioner's wife has been admitted in hospital since 13.05.2020, and that his 7 year old daughter is alone at their Bail Appln.1061/2020 Page 1 of 3 residence without any other person to take proper care of her. The petitioner has admittedly been in custody since his arrest on 12.03.2014.

3. The petitioner's application for interim bail was dismissed by the Sessions Court vide order dated 21.05.2020. A copy of the order and the status report filed by the investigating officer before the Sessions Court are on record.

4. Ms. Tiwari, learned APP has drawn my attention to the contents of the status report to the effect that the offence out of which the present FIR arises was committed while the petitioner was on bail in another case, the role ascribed to the petitioner in the offence, as well as the fact that a witness has alleged that she was threatened during the course of trial. While these factors do prima facie militate against grant of interim bail to the petitioner at this stage, the situation of the petitioner's daughter also needs to be considered.

5. The documents placed on record do not reveal clearly whether the petitioner's wife remains in hospital even today, after the lapse of more than two weeks since she was admitted, and whether her complaint of pain in the abdomen is of such a nature that continued hospitalisation is required.

6. In this view of the matter, the investigating officer is directed to furnish a detailed status report regarding the medical condition and hospitalisation record of the petitioner's wife, as well as the likely period of hospitalisation. The status report will also deal specifically with the arrangements that are presently in place for the care of the petitioner's daughter, alongwith any possible alternative arrangements in that behalf. The status report be filed by 02.06.2020.

Bail Appln.1061/2020 Page 2 of 3

7. Although it is stated in the petition that the main reason for the petitioner applying for interim bail is the hospitalisation of the petitioner's wife, certain grounds have also been raised regarding the petitioner's own ailment of diabetes, lower back pain, kidney stones and difficulty in vision. As far as the petitioner's ailments are concerned, the jail authorities are directed to ensure that suitable treatment is provided to the petitioner.

8. The jail authorities are also directed to transmit the nominal roll of the petitioner to the Court by 02.06.2020.

9. List before the Roster Bench on 03.06.2020.

PRATEEK JALAN, J MAY 29, 2020 'pv' Bail Appln.1061/2020 Page 3 of 3

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Delhi High Court - Orders