Delhi High Court - Orders
Mohd. Ateeb @ Atif vs State Nct Of Delhi on 13 February, 2023
Author: Anup Jairam Bhambhani
Bench: Anup Jairam Bhambhani
$~39
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ BAIL APPLN. 467/2023
MOHD. ATEEB @ ATIF ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. D.V. Khatri and Mr. M D
Moshin, Advocates.
versus
STATE NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Shoaib Haider, APP for the State
with SI Bijender, P.S.: Jama Masjid.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI
ORDER
% 13.02.2023 By way of the present petition under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 369/2022 dated 29.09.2022 registered under sections 186/353/506/509/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('IPC') at P.S. Jama Masjid.
2. Mr. D.V. Khatri, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits, that the FIR has been registered by officers of the BSES Yamuna Power Ltd. arising from allegations in relation to inspection of the petitioner's premises for alleged theft of electricity. Counsel submits that the entire inspection was video-graphed; that the offences alleged, other than the offence under section 353 IPC, are bailable; and that the allegations in relation to the offence under section 353 IPC are Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed BAIL APPLN. 467/2023 Page 1 of 2 By:NEERAJ Signing Date:20.02.2023 17:18:29 false. He submits that the falsity will be evident from the videography made. He further submits that there was no 'assault' or use of 'criminal force', for which reason no medical examination of any of the BSES officials was ever conducted.
3. Issue notice.
4. Mr. Shoaib Haider, learned APP appears for the State on advance copy; accepts notice; and seeks time file status report.
5. Let status report be filed within 06 weeks; with advance copy to the opposing counsel.
6. Upon being queried, the learned APP submits, on instructions of the Investigating Officer ('I.O.'), that the videography made has not been seized by the I.O. from BSES. He submits that the I.O. will seize the videography and place it before the court for viewing.
7. Accordingly, let the videography be placed on record on a pen-drive.
8. Furthermore, on instructions of the I.O., learned APP submits that, at this stage the I.O. does not need custodial interrogation of the petitioner, provided the petitioner cooperates in the investigation.
9. Accordingly, subject to the petitioner cooperating in the investigation as and when called by the I.O. by written notice, the petitioner shall not be arrested, till the next date of hearing.
10. Re-notify on 17th May 2023.
ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J FEBRUARY 13, 2023/ak Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed BAIL APPLN. 467/2023 Page 2 of 2 By:NEERAJ Signing Date:20.02.2023 17:18:29