Delhi High Court - Orders
J. Dalvin Suresh vs Central Bureau Of Investigation & Ors on 11 December, 2024
Author: Dinesh Kumar Sharma
Bench: Dinesh Kumar Sharma
$~47
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(CRL) 3821/2024
J. DALVIN SURESH .....Petitioner
Through: Mr.Abhijit Anand, Ms.Tisha Kaushik,
Ms.Prachi Mittal, Ms.Arpita Singh,
Ms.Deepshikha Upadhyay and
Ms.Niyati Dayma, Advocates
versus
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ORS.
.....Respondents
Through: Mr.Rajesh Kumar, SPP for CBI with
Ms.Mishika Pandita and Mr.Changez
Khan, Advocates
Mr.Sanjeev Sharma, Ms.Sanya Sud,
Ms.Vaishali Goyal and Mr.Hunar
Malik, Advocates for R-2 and 3
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SHARMA
ORDER
% 11.12.2024 CRL.M.A. 36700/2024 (Exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of.
CRL.M.A. 37079/2024 (to be listed in supplementary list on 09.12.2024.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the instant application has become infructuous.
In view thereof, the application stands dismissed as rendered infructuous.
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 11/12/2024 at 23:56:00 W.P.(CRL) 3821/2024
1. The instant writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, (B.N.S.S.) 2023 has been filed on behalf of the petitioner challenging the impugned order dated 23.09.2024, whereby the learned Trial Court has admitted the respondents No.2 and 3 on interim bail till 07.12.2024, subject to certain conditions.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order dated 23.09.2024 granting interim bail to respondents No.2 and 3 is in violation of the well-established principles laid down by the Supreme Court and this Court regarding the grant of interim bail. It is submitted that no grounds were even mentioned in the impugned order for the grant of interim bail. It is further submitted that the impugned order is passed in the teeth of certain judgements passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Arvind Kejriwal v. Directorate of Enforcement, (2024) SCC Online SC 410 and Sunil Fulchand Shah v. Union of India & Ors., (2000) 3 SCC 409.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Trial Court has failed to apply the judicial mind and did not take into account the serious nature of the offences, ongoing investigation and the risk of witnesses being tampered with. It is submitted that since corruption- related charges against the accused is still pending investigation, the grant of interim bail is inappropriate. In support of his arguments, he has placed reliance upon the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of P. Chidambaram v. Directorate of Enforcement, AIR 2019 SC 4198. It is further submitted that the 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 11/12/2024 at 23:56:00 criminal antecedents of respondents No.2 and 3 were also not taken into account by the learned Trial Court while granting the interim bail.
4. Issue notice. Mr.Rajesh Kumar, learned SPP for the respondent-CBI accepts notice. Ms.Sanya Sud, learned counsel for respondents No.2 and 3 accepts notice.
5. Let the reply be filed on behalf of the respondents within four weeks with an advance copy supplied to the opposite party.
6. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to bring on record certain judgments.
7. Let the petitioner file the additional documents which he wishes to bring on record within four weeks.
8. List on 21.01.2025.
CRL.M.A. 36701/2024 (Stay)
1. By way of this application, the applicant/petitioner seeks stay of operation of the impugned order dated 23.09.2024, vide which the interim bail was granted to the respondents No.2 and 3.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant/petitioner submits that since the impugned order suffers from various legal infirmities, the operation of the impugned order may be stayed.
3. Issue notice. Mr.Rajesh Kumar, learned SPP for the respondent-CBI accepts notice. Ms.Sanya Sud, learned counsel for the respondents No.2 and 3 accepts notice.
4. Let the reply be filed on behalf of the respondents within four weeks, with an advance copy supplied to the opposite party.
5. List on 21.01.2025.
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 11/12/2024 at 23:56:00 Copy of Order be given Dasti.
DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J DECEMBER 11, 2024 Dy/ht 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 11/12/2024 at 23:56:00