Sharad Giri vs State Of Nct on 12 May, 2020

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Sharad Giri vs State Of Nct on 12 May, 2020

Bench: Mukta Gupta

$~9

*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+      BAIL APPLN. 786/2020

       SHARAD GIRI                                       ..... Petitioner

                               Represented by:     Mr.Brajesh Pandey, Adv.

                                Versus

       STATE OF NCT                                       .....Respondent

                               Represented by:     Mr. Amit Gupta, APP for the
                                                   State.

                                                   Mr. Trideep Pais, Adv. for
                                                   complainant.

       CORAM:
       HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

                         ORDER

% 12.05.2020

1. The hearing has been conducted through Video Conferencing.

2. By this application the petitioner seeks regular bail in case FIR No. 149/2019 under Sections 419/420/120B IPC registered as PS Special Cell, Delhi.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset states that he would be restricting the present petition seeking interim bail on parity with the two co- accused Anurag and Shivam who have already been granted bail by the learned Trial Court vide orders dated 29th March, 2020 and 29th April, 2020 as the two accused fell within the purview of the Guidelines dated 28 th March, 2020 issued by the High Power Committee of the High Court of Delhi.

Bail Appln. 786/2020 Page 1 of 3

4. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the complainant opposing the bail submit that the allegations against the petitioner and the co-accused are of serious nature and further investigation for the offences is still pending.

5. The above-noted FIR was registered on the 29th September, 2019 on the complaint of one Sonu Vashisht, authorized signatory for Exide Life Insurance Company Limited. The complainant stated that the complainant company served over 15 lakhs customers and managed assets over 12,500/- crores of rupees. The company focused on providing long-term protection and giving plans to its customers besides providing other services. It is the case of the prosecution that Shivam, the co-accused had stolen the data of Exide Life Insurance Company Limited which was found in the laptop recovered at his instance and based on the said data the petitioner and the co-accused Anurag made phone calls to gullible customers purportedly acting as agents of Exide Life Insurance Company, though they had no connect whatsoever with the said company.

6. It is not disputed by the learned APP for the State or learned counsel for the complainant that the co-accused Anurag and Shivam have been released on interim bails vide orders dated 29th March, 2020 and 29th April, 2020 as their cases fell within the purview of relaxations granted by the High Power Committee constituted by this Court for easing the number of prisoners in the jail to overcome the COVID-19 situation.

7. Since the learned counsel for the petitioner is confining the present application for seeking interim bail on parity, this Court finds that the petitioner is entitled to get interim bail on parity.

8. Consequently, the petitioner is directed to be released on interim bail for a period of 45 days from the date of his release on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety bond of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Jail Superintendent. The petitioner is directed to inform of his mobile Bail Appln. 786/2020 Page 2 of 3 number as also of his family members to the Superintendent Jail as well as to the investigating officer.

9. Application is disposed of.

10. Copy of the order be uploaded on the website.

MUKTA GUPTA, J.

MAY 12, 2020/ga Bail Appln. 786/2020 Page 3 of 3

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Delhi High Court - Orders