Del. HC: Obtaining of Voice Samples of Accused Must be in Compliance with Telegraph Act  ||  P&H HC: Peaceful Protest is Not a Penal Offence Under Section 188 IPC  ||  All HC: AO Must Consider Form 10 u/s 17 Supplied After Limitation But Before Assessment is Completed  ||  Ker. HC Issues Guidelines on Handling Digital Evidence Containing Sexually Explicit Materials  ||  Del. HC: Cyber Crimes Dissuade Aspirations of Advanced 'Digital Bharat'  ||  Del. HC: Suspension of Entity Can’t be Continued Indefinitely  ||  Del. HC: Woman Can be 'Karta' of HUF  ||  SC: Court Can’t Impose Bail Condition that Husband Must Resume Conjugal Life with Wife  ||  SC Takes Suo Moto Cognizance of Cal. HC Judgment that Adviced Adolescents on Sexual Behavior  ||  JKL HC: Court Can’t be Guided by Personal Law While Deciding Apportionment of Compensation    

Mumtaz vs. State(Nct Of Delhi) & Anr. - (High Court of Delhi) (28 Dec 2022)

Mere pendency of several criminal cases against the accused cannot itself be the basis for refusal of bail



The present application is filed under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), seeking regular bail in FIR, filed under Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959, registered at Police Station.

The applicant is in custody since 28th August, 2022. The co- accused who were found to be in possession of the weapons have already been granted bail by the learned Trial Court. The alleged arms have already been recovered and no further recovery is allegedly left to be made at the instance of the applicant. The allegations, whether the accused was in custody of the alleged weapons or whether they were planted by the Police would be tested during the trial.

The applicant, though, was found to be involved in 23 other cases but has either been discharged, acquitted or granted bail. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Prabhakar Tewari v. State of U.P., had observed that mere pendency of several criminal cases against the accused cannot itself be the basis for refusal of bail. The same can be a factor, however, cannot a sole basis for refusal of prayer of bail. Admittedly, even though charge-sheet is filed, the investigation, as per the State, is likely to take more time before any trial can start. It is not alleged that the applicant has tried to jump the bail in any of the cases where he has been granted bail earlier by the Courts.

The object of bail is not punitive but to secure the presence of accused during the trial. It has also not been alleged that incarceration of the applicant is required in order to prevent the applicant from tampering with evidence or to prevent him from extending any inducement or threat to any of the witnesses.

In view of the facts and circumstances in mind and the fact that the trial is likely to take some time, no purpose would be served by keeping the applicant in further incarceration and the applicant has made out a case for grant of regular bail. The applicant is directed to be released on bail. Application allowed.


Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2023 - All Rights Reserved