Moti Lal Vs. Delhi Administration

Moti Lal vs Delhi Administration

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Oct 22, 1992

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/693854

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/693854
Court: Delhi High Court
Judge: Mohd. Shamirn, J.
Decided On: Oct 22, 1992
Case Number: Criminal Miscellaneous (Main) Appeal No. 2425 of 1992
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

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

- - 5,000.00 with a personal bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.

Key legal issue: Criminal
Acts & sections: Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 439

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Moti Lal

Advocate P.P. Grover and; Hirdayjot Singh, Advs

Respondent

Delhi Administration

Legal References

Acts: Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 439
Reported In: 50(1993)DLT4

Excerpt

- - 5,000.00 with a personal bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.mohd. shamim, j.(1) this is an application by the petitioner for releasing him on bail. learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case the deceased smt. vandana had been residing with her parents for the last six months the fore her death i.e. on 21/05/1992.1 in any case, according to the statement of her mother smt. bhagwati, the deceased had been residing with her parents for the last three months. a compromise was entered into in between the deceased and the petitioner on 1/05/1992 as per terms of the compromise the deceased was to re -join the petitioner on 23/05/19921 in the,above circumstances, the learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the instant case does not fall within the domain of section 304b of the indian penal code and the petitioner is entitled to bail.i he cannot be held responsible for the suicide committed by the deceased on 21stmay, 1992. hence the petitioner is entitled to an order of bail.(2) learned public prosecutor mr. hirdyajot singh has opposed theapplication. according to him the deceased was treated with cruelty and there was a demand of dowry as per the statement of the mother of the deceased smt. bhagwati.(3) considering the above facts and circumstance i think present case is a fit case for bail. let the petitioner be released on pail on his furnishing a surety in the sum of rs. 5,000.00 with a personal bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

Full Judgment

Mohd. Shamim, J.

(1) This is an application by the petitioner for releasing him on bail. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case The deceased Smt. Vandana had been residing with her parents for the last six months the fore her death i.e. on 21/05/1992.1 In any case, according to the statement of her mother Smt. Bhagwati, the deceased had been residing with her parents for the last three months. A compromise was entered into in between the deceased and the petitioner on 1/05/1992 As per terms of the compromise the deceased was to re -join the petitioner on 23/05/19921 In the,above circumstances, the learned Counsel for the petitioner has contended that the instant case does not fall within the domain of Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code and the petitioner is entitled to bail.I He cannot be held responsible for the suicide committed by the deceased on 21stMay, 1992. Hence the petitioner is entitled to an order of bail.

(2) Learned Public Prosecutor Mr. Hirdyajot Singh has opposed theapplication. According to him the deceased was treated with cruelty and there was a demand of dowry as per the statement of the mother of the deceased Smt. Bhagwati.

(3) Considering the above facts and circumstance I think present case is a fit case for bail. Let the petitioner be released on pail on his furnishing a surety in the sum of Rs. 5,000.00 with a personal bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.

Same Court & Year Delhi · 1992 Same Parties Moti Lal vs Delhi Administration Same Subject Criminal Same Judge Mohd. Shamirn, J. Acts & Sections Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 439

Criminal