Nagina vs.state

Nagina vs State

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Jan 11, 2019

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1220558

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/1220558
Court: Delhi High Court
Decided On: Jan 11, 2019
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

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

Criminal

Key legal issue: Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Nagina

Respondent

State

Excerpt

.....counsel for the petitioner points out that by order dated bail appln.59/2019 page 1 of 2 17.12.2018, petitioner was granted liberty to approach the trial court to seek recall of proceedings under section 82 cr.p.c. he points out that the protection was granted to the petitioner till the disposal of such application.4. learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the application has been filed and the same has been fixed for further proceeding on 15.01.2019. he submits that the said application is pending before the court of metropolitan magistrate and in view of the sections of ipc involved, the metropolitan magistrate is not competent to grant bail to the petitioner and there is an apprehension that if the application seeking recall of proceedings under section 82 cr.p.c is dismissed, the petitioner may be taken in custody.5. keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that, in case the application of the petitioner seeking recall of proceedings under section 82 cr.p.c, is dismissed, the interim protection granted to the petitioner by order dated 17.12.2018 in bail appln.2984/2018, shall enure to the benefit of the petitioner for a period of one week thereafter. petition is disposed of in the above terms. order dasti under signatures of the court master.6. 7. january11 2019/st sanjeev sachdeva, j bail appln.59/2019 page 2 of 2

Full Judgment

$~20 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + BAIL APPLN. 59/2019 Judgment delivered on:

11. 01.2019 NAGINA STATE versus ........ Petitioner

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

: : For the Respondent Mr. Kumar Vikram, Advocate. Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya, APP for the State with SI Praveen Kumar. CORAM:-

"HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT1101.2019 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.

(ORAL) Crl.M.A.499/2019 (exemption) Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions. BAIL APPLN. 59/2019 1.... Petitioner

seeks anticipatory bail in FIR No.129/2018 under Sections 498A/304B/34 IPC, Police Station Ranhola.

2. Issue Notice. Notice accepted by Learned APP for the state. With consent of parties petition is taken up for disposal.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner points out that by order dated BAIL APPLN.59/2019 Page 1 of 2 17.12.2018, petitioner was granted liberty to approach the Trial Court to seek recall of proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C. He points out that the protection was granted to the petitioner till the disposal of such application.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the application has been filed and the same has been fixed for further proceeding on 15.01.2019. He submits that the said application is pending before the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate and in view of the sections of IPC involved, the Metropolitan Magistrate is not competent to grant bail to the petitioner and there is an apprehension that if the application seeking recall of proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C is dismissed, the petitioner may be taken in custody.

5. Keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that, in case the application of the petitioner seeking recall of proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C, is dismissed, the interim protection granted to the petitioner by order dated 17.12.2018 in Bail Appln.2984/2018, shall enure to the benefit of the petitioner for a period of one week thereafter. Petition is disposed of in the above terms. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.

6. 7. JANUARY11 2019/st SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J BAIL APPLN.59/2019 Page 2 of 2

Same Court & Year Delhi · 2019 Same Parties Nagina vs State Same Subject Criminal