Delhi High Court - Orders
Rajinder @ Kallu vs State on 29 July, 2021
Author: Mukta Gupta
Bench: Mukta Gupta
$~59
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ BAIL APPLN. 1289/2021
RAJINDER @ KALLU ..... Petitioner
Represented by: Mr. Ashish Negi, Adv.
versus
STATE ..... Respondent
Represented by: Mr. Ravi Nayak, APP for State with
SI Suresh, PS Malviya Nagar.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
ORDER
% 29.07.2021 The hearing has been conducted through Video Conferencing.
1. By this petition the petitioner seeks interim bail for a period of one month to get the surgery of cataract of his father performed, in FIR No. 30/2018 under Section 302/201/307/34/120-B IPC and Section 25/27 Arms Act registered at PS Malviya Nagar.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that petitioner was granted interim bail for a period of two weeks in October, 2020 and there is no allegation that the petitioner misused the said concession.
3. Learned APP for the State opposing the interim bail submits that when the petitioner was granted interim bail in October, 2020 the same was for getting the surgery of back of the mother to be conducted, however no such surgery was conducted. Further, the cataract surgery of the petitioner's father for one eye has already been done while the petitioner was in custody and the petitioner's sister's daughter accompanied the father, as the same is Signature Not Verified BAIL APPLN. 1289/2021 Page 1 ofSigned Digitally 2 By:JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA Signing Date:29.07.2021 22:07:59 a day procedure.
4. Considering the fact that presently surgery of the cataract of the petitioner's father has to be performed on the left eye and though earlier also surgery was performed with the help of the family members who attended the same, however this time the petitioner has to arrange for the funds as well, and the fact that when he was granted interim bail in October 2020 there is no allegation that he misused the said concession, this Court deems it fit to grant interim bail to the petitioner.
5. It is therefore directed that the petitioner be released on interim bail for a period of two weeks from the date of his release on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of ₹25,000/- with two surety bonds of the like amount, out of which one of the surety would be a family member of the petitioner, subject to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court/ Duty Magistrate, further subject to the condition that the petitioner and the sureties would furnish their mobile phone numbers to the SHO PS Malviya Nagar and the mobile phones will be kept in active mode during the period of interim bail granted to the petitioner. It is further directed that in case the surgery of petitioner's father is not performed on 1st August, 2021 the date fixed, the petitioner will surrender to custody on 3rd August, 2021.
6. Petition is disposed of.
7. Order be uploaded on the website of this Court.
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
JULY 29, 2021 'ga' Signature Not Verified BAIL APPLN. 1289/2021 Page 2 ofSigned Digitally 2 By:JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA Signing Date:29.07.2021 22:07:59