On 27th August, a bench of Delhi High Court consisting of Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar while hearing a bail application, in the case of Mudassir Nasir Bhat v. Manjit Kumar, opined that where the allegations against the petitioners are of dacoity which they committed in the wee hours of the night posing themselves as officers of Crime Branch, it cannot be said that they will not be in a position to tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
Facts of the case:
The present two bail applications have been submitted by the petitioners under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail in a case where they are charged under Section 395/411/419/452/34/120B IPC for claiming themselves as police officials, have forcefully broken the electronic lock and have entered in the office of IYEO Technology Ghitorni, New Delhi and lifted many items from there.
Contention of the petitioners:
It was submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are young persons in their early 20 and they have been falsely implicated in the present case. It was also submitted that recoveries had also been effected.
It was also argued that the two co-accused are already on bail and that there wass a delay in making the complaint and there is also a delay of 10 hours in making the PCR call.
Contention of the respondent:
On the contrary, it is submitted by the learned APP for the State that initially the case was registered U/s 392/419/34 IPC and section 395 IPC was added lateron and the allegations have now become serious as a dacoity has taken place in the midnight in the office of the complainant.He further submitted that the petitioners posed themselves as officers of the crime branch and then committed dacoity of the electronic items as mentioned in the FIR.
It was also submitted that the petitioners have already moved around 4 bail applications each before the Court of Sessions which have already been dismissed. It was therefore urged that the petitioners cannot claim parity with the two other co-accused persons who have been released on bail as the case of the petitioners are different from those two co-accused persons.
Observation and judgement of the court:
The Hon’ble bench of the court observed that as the petitioners had the audacity to pose themselves as officers of Crime Branch while committing the dacoity, so when such is the courage of the petitioners, then its opinion, it cannot be said that they will not be in a position to tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
Therefore, looking into the seriousness of the offence, the court held that no ground for bail had been made out. Thus, the bail applications were dismissed.
Read Judgment ;
Social media is bold.
Social media is young.
Social media raises questions.
Social media is not satisfied with an answer.
Social media looks at the big picture.
Social media is interested in every detail.
social media is curious.
Social media is free.
Social media is irreplaceable.
But never irrelevant.
Social media is you.
(With input from news agency language)
If you like this story, share it with a friend!
We are a non-profit organization. Help us financially to keep our journalism free from government and corporate pressure
0 Comments