Inder vs.state ( Nct of Delhi)

Inder vs State ( Nct of Delhi)

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Nov 30, 2018

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1219655

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1219655
Court: Delhi High Court
Decided On: Nov 30, 2018
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Inder

Respondent

State ( Nct of Delhi)

Excerpt

.....settled the disputes with the complainant and her daughter. he submits that the petitioners are aged about 22 and 23 years respectively and incarceration would prejudice them seriously.4.... petitioners were granted interim protection by order dated 11.04.2018 subject to their joining investigation.5. learned addl. pp, under instructions, submits that the petitioners did join investigation whenever they were so required by the investigating officer and investigation qua the role of the petitioners is complete and the chargesheet is in the process of being finalized for filing in the trial court.6. without commenting on the merits of the case and keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances and on perusal of the records, i am satisfied that the petitioners have made out a case for grant of anticipatory bail.7. accordingly, it is directed that in the event of arrest, the arresting officer/io/sho shall release the petitioners on bail on their furnishing a bail bond in the sum of rs. 10,000/- each with one surety each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer/sho concerned.... petitioners shall not do bail appln. 780/2018 & 1042/2018 page 2 of 3 anything that may prejudice either the trial or the prosecution witnesses.... petitioners shall not contact the complainant or her daughter.8. 9. the petitions are disposed of in the above terms. order dasti under signatures of the court master. november30 2018 ‘rs’ sanjeev sachdeva, j bail appln. 780/2018 & 1042/2018 page 3 of 3

Full Judgment

$~7 & 8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:

30. 11.2018 BAIL APPLN. 780/2018 ROHIT versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) + BAIL APPLN. 1042/2018 INDER versus STATE ( NCT OF DELHI) ........ Petitioner

..... Respondent ........ Petitioner

..... Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner

: For the Respondent: Mr. L.S. Saini and Mr. Lalit Saini, Advs. Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for the State with SI Anita CORAM:-

"HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT3011.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.

(ORAL) 1.... Petitioner

s seek anticipatory bail in FIR No.56/2018 under Sections 354/354-B/354-D/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Police Station Chandni Mahal, Delhi. Section 8 of the POCSO Act was also added in respect of petitioner/applicant - Inder. BAIL APPLN. 780/2018 & 1042/2018 Page 1 of 3 2. The allegations are that the petitioners are neighbours and that they misbehaved with the complainant and her daughter.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that petitioners have settled the disputes with the complainant and her daughter. He submits that the petitioners are aged about 22 and 23 years respectively and incarceration would prejudice them seriously.

4.... Petitioner

s were granted interim protection by order dated 11.04.2018 subject to their joining investigation.

5. Learned Addl. PP, under instructions, submits that the petitioners did join investigation whenever they were so required by the Investigating Officer and investigation qua the role of the petitioners is complete and the chargesheet is in the process of being finalized for filing in the Trial Court.

6. Without commenting on the merits of the case and keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances and on perusal of the records, I am satisfied that the petitioners have made out a case for grant of anticipatory bail.

7. Accordingly, it is directed that in the event of arrest, the arresting officer/IO/SHO shall release the petitioners on bail on their furnishing a bail bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- each with one surety each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/Investigating Officer/SHO concerned.... Petitioner

s shall not do BAIL APPLN. 780/2018 & 1042/2018 Page 2 of 3 anything that may prejudice either the trial or the prosecution witnesses.... Petitioner

s shall not contact the complainant or her daughter.

8. 9. The petitions are disposed of in the above terms. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master. NOVEMBER30 2018 ‘rs’ SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J BAIL APPLN. 780/2018 & 1042/2018 Page 3 of 3

Same Court & Year Delhi · 2018 Same Parties Inder vs State ( Nct of Delhi) Same Subject Land Acquisition