Suresh Kumar vs.state

Suresh Kumar vs State

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Apr 25, 2019

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1222807

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/1222807
Court: Delhi High Court
Decided On: Apr 25, 2019
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

Suresh Kumar

Respondent

State

Excerpt

.....has been in custody since 27.07.2017. bail appln.977/2019 page 1 of 2 5. learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the allegations in the fir, the alleged incident happened on the heat of the moment when the petitioner was intoxicated. he submits that the petitioner has already been in custody for nearly 1 year and 10 months. he submits that present petition has been filed by the son of the petitioner, who was the injured, seeking bail for his father 6. learned app for the state, under instructions from the investigating officer, confirms that petitioner does not have any adverse antecedents apart from the subject offence. she submits that prosecution evidence is still underway and is likely to take some time.7. without commenting on the merits of the case and keeping in view the totality of facts and circumstances, i am satisfied that petitioner has made out a case for grant of regular bail.8. accordingly, on petitioner furnishing a bail bond in the sum of rs.20,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court, the petitioner shall be released on bail, if not required in any other case.... petitioner shall not do anything which may prejudice either the trial or the prosecution witnesses.9. petition is allowed in the above terms.10. order dasti under signatures of the court master. april25 2019/st sanjeev sachdeva, j bail appln.977/2019 page 2 of 2

Full Judgment

$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + BAIL APPLN. 977/2019 Judgment delivered on:

25. 04.2019 SURESH KUMAR ........ Petitioner

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

: Mr. Lokesh Kumar, Advocate. For the Respondent : Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APP for the State. CORAM:-

"HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA SI Virendra Kumar, PS Seelampur JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.

(ORAL) 1.... Petitioner

seeks regular bail in FIR No.373/2017 under Section 307 IPC and Section 27 Arms Act, Police Station Seelampur.

2. Subject FIR was registered on the complaint of the wife of the petitioner and the injured is the son of the petitioner.

3. It is alleged that petitioner was in the habit of drinking everyday and on an issue with regard to return of money which the injured was demanding from a neighbour, who was the friend of the petitioner, petitioner got angry and brought a country made pistol and shot the injured.

4.... Petitioner

has been in custody since 27.07.2017. BAIL APPLN.977/2019 Page 1 of 2 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the allegations in the FIR, the alleged incident happened on the heat of the moment when the petitioner was intoxicated. He submits that the petitioner has already been in custody for nearly 1 year and 10 months. He submits that present petition has been filed by the son of the petitioner, who was the injured, seeking bail for his father 6. Learned APP for the State, under instructions from the Investigating Officer, confirms that petitioner does not have any adverse antecedents apart from the subject offence. She submits that prosecution evidence is still underway and is likely to take some time.

7. Without commenting on the merits of the case and keeping in view the totality of facts and circumstances, I am satisfied that petitioner has made out a case for grant of regular bail.

8. Accordingly, on petitioner furnishing a bail bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, the petitioner shall be released on bail, if not required in any other case.... Petitioner

shall not do anything which may prejudice either the trial or the prosecution witnesses.

9. Petition is allowed in the above terms.

10. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master. APRIL25 2019/st SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J BAIL APPLN.977/2019 Page 2 of 2

Same Court & Year Delhi · 2019 Same Parties Suresh Kumar vs State Same Subject Land Acquisition