Research › Search › Judgment

Delhi High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 2437 (DEL)

Nishant Madan v. State

2014-09-11

PRATIBHA RANI

body2014
JUDGMENT : 1. This is an application under Section 439 read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. moved on behalf of the Petitioner Nishant Madan for grant of bail to him in case FIR No. 02/2014, under Sections 489-B/489-C/120-B IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act, registered at Police Station Special Cell, Lodhi Colony, New Delhi. 2. On behalf of the Petitioner, it has been submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 16.1.2014. She has further submitted that no recovery has been effected from the present Petitioner and the nature of evidence to be adduced in the present case is of such type that it cannot be tampered with by the present Petitioner. It is further submitted that basically the case against the Petitioner is to be proved on the basis of CDRs and the coversation in this regard that has allegedly taken place with the co-accused and the witnesses to be examined in this case are official witnesses, the same cannot be influenced by the present Petitioner. 3. It is further submitted that one of the co-accused, namely, Lokesh Garg on identical footing has been released on bail by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge merely on the ground that he was a practising lawyer. It is further submitted that the Applicant was also working with a Travel Agency and merely because he is not a lawyer, the same should not be a ground to keep him in custody during trial. 4. Learned APP for the State opposed the grant of bail to the Petitioner, However, she could not dispute the factum of the co-accused being released on bail by the learned Trial Court on the ground that he was a practising lawyer at Tis Hazari Courts. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the co-accused has already been released on bail, the application seeking bail is allowed and the Petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Court, subject to the condition that the Petitioner shall not leave the country without permission of the Court concerned and shall not tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses in any manner whatsoever. 25,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Court, subject to the condition that the Petitioner shall not leave the country without permission of the Court concerned and shall not tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses in any manner whatsoever. The Petitioner is further directed to surrender his passport, if any, with the concerned Court and in case he is not holder of a passport, he shall file an affidavit to this effect. 6. Application stands disposed of in the above terms. 7. Any observations made hereinabove for the purpose of dealing with the contentions of counsel for the petitioner shall not have any effect on the decision of this case on merits at any stage of the trial. 8. Copy of this order be sent to the Jail Superintendent concerned for information and compliance. 9. Copy of this order be given dasti to counsel for the Petitioner, as prayed.