BAIL APPLN.--889/2019. Case: GAURAV Vs. STATE (NCT OF DELHI). High Court of Delhi (India)
| Case Number | BAIL APPLN.--889/2019 |
| Citation | NA |
| Judgement Date | May 20, 2019 |
| Court | High Court of Delhi (India) |
$~14
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 20.05.2019 + BAIL APPLN. 889/2019
GAURAV ..... Petitioner
versus
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Mr. Mukul Gupta, Sr. Advocate with Mr.
Nahata, Mr. Sumit Kumar Mishra and Mr. Pushkar Mehta, Advocates.
For the Respondent: Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya, APP for the State.
CORAM:-
HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
-
Status report is filed. The same is taken on record.
-
Petitioner seeks regular bail in FIR No.725/2018 under Sections 186/353/332/307/34 IPC, Police Station Punjabi Bagh.
-
FIR has been registered on the complaint of In-charge of a
Van. It is alleged that information was received that two boys sitting in a car were misbehaving with some girls. When the PCR reached the spot, neither the caller nor the girls were found. When they called back the caller, he gave the number of the vehicle in which the
boys were allegedly sitting. When the constable of the confronted the two boys, it is alleged that the petitioner, who sitting on the driver’s seat abused the constable. When the constable attempted to remove them from vehicle, the petitioner is alleged have driven his vehicle on the constable thereby causing grievous injuries to him.
-
The Constable is alleged to have suffered multiple injuries as per the medical report, the nature of injuries sustained is grievous.
-
Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated. He submits that no public witness been joined in the investigation to corroborate the incident or manner in which the petitioner has been arrested. He further submi that the alleged location where the incident is alleged to happened is covered by several CCTV cameras, however, no CCTV footage has been relied on to corroborate the offence.
-
Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a young boy of 25 years of age and has been in custody since 19.12.2018. He submits that investigation is complete chargesheet has already been filed and trial is likely to take substantial time. He further submits that the petitioner has clean antecedents.
-
...
To continue reading
Request your trial