State V/s Vikas Jha

FIR No. 131/19

P.S. Civil Lines
U/s 420/120B IPC
11.12.2020
Vide Office Order No. 1277/22595-765 DJ(HQJCovid Lockdown/ Physical Courts

Roster/ 2020 dated 25.11.2020, matters are taken up physically.

ne present application for grant of bail Uls 437 Cr.P.C. has been moved on

behalf of applicantlaccused Vikas Jha s/o Late Ram Pratap Jha.

Present Sh.A.K. Shukla, Ld. Substitute APP for State.
Ms. Alisha, proxy counsel for applicant/accused.
Reply of IO has been filed electronically. Copy offsame has been
sent to Ld. Counsel for the applicant/accused electronically.

It is submitted by proxy counsel that main counsel is not available

today and therefore, she seeks adjournment for today.

Heard.
In view of submission, be put up for arguments on the bail

application on
17.12.2020 (physical hearing date).
One copy of the order be uploaded on Delhi District Court Website.
Copy of order be also sent to the e-mail of jail superintendent and SHO PS Civil
Lines/Sadar Bazar and Ld. Counsel for the
applicant. The printout of the
application, reply and order be kept for records and be tagged with the final
report.

(SHIVLI TALWAR)
MM-06(C))THC/Delhi/11.12.2020
 FIR NO. 528/20
P.S. Civil Lines
U/s 279/337/304A IPC
11.12.2020
Vide Office Order No. 1277/22595-765 DJ(HQ]/Covid Lockdown/ Physical
Courts Roster/ 2020 dated 25.11.2020, matters are taken up
physically.

This is an application for releasing of vehicle bearing No. UP-14-EL-

3840 on superdari filed by applicant/ registered owner Sh. Gyanendra
Kumar Maheshwari.

Present: Sh.A.K. Shukla, Ld. Substitute APP for State.

Sh. N.K. Sharma, Ld. Counsel for applicant alongwith
applicant in person.

Since reply has not been filed by 1O concerned, let notice be

issued to 10 concerned to file reply to the present application for

14.12.2020.
(SHIVLI TALWAR)
MM-06(C)/THC/Delhi/11.12.2020
 FIR No. 0323/20
P.S. Sadar Bazar
U/s 379/356/411 IPC
11.12.2020
Vide Office Order o. 1277/22595-765 DJJHOVCovid Lockdown/ Physical Courts
Rosterl 2o20 dated 25.11.2020, matters are taken up physically.
This is an application for releasing of mobile on superdari filed by applicant Sh.
Ashok Kumar.
Present Sh.A.K. Shukla, Ld. Substitute APP for
State.
Sh. Ashok Kumar,
applicant in person.
Reply filed by the IO. Same is taken on record. As per the reply, it is stated
that o has objection in releasing the mobile phone Mobistar IMEI NO.
no

911650252175740, 9116500252175757 to the applicant Ashok Kumar as it is no more

required for the purpose of investigation. Instead of releasing the said mobile on
superdari, I am of the considered view that the aforesaid mobile has to be released as
per directions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case titled as "Sunder Bhai Ambalal Desai
Vs. State of Gujrat, AIR 2003 SC 638, which has been reiterated by Hon'ble High
Court of Delhi in case titled as "Manjit Singh Vs. State".
Considering the facts and circumstances and law laid down by higher
courts, above said mobile be released to the applicant on furnishing security
bond/indemnity bond as per valuation report of the aforesaid mobile. Accordingly, 10 is
directed to get the valuation done of the mobile phone prior to releasing the same to the
applicant, as per directions of Hon'ble Supreme Court. Coloured photographs of the
mobile phone be also taken as per rules.
Copy of this order be given dasti to the applicant. One copy of the order
uploaded on Delhi District Court Website. Copy of order be also sent to the e-mail of
SHO PS Civil Lines/Sadar Bazar and Ld. Counsel for the applicant/applicant.

(SHIVLI TALWAR)
MM-06(C)/THC/Delhi/11.12.2020
 FIR No. 222/20
PS Sadar Bazar
State Vs Vicky @ Punjabi
Us 454/380/41 1/34 IPC

I1.12.2020
Vide Office Order No. 1277/22595-76s DJ(HOYCovid Lockdown/ Physical Courts

Roster/ 2020 dated 25.11.2020, matters are laken up

physically.
Present: Sh.A.K. Shukla. Ld. Substitute APP for State.
IO HC Mithun Kumar in
person.
Information sheet and death summary in respect of custodial death of
prisoner Vicky @ Punjabi who died on 30.10.2020 at 04.30 PM at DDU hospital
has been received from Superintendent of Prison, Central Jail No.3 Tihar, New

Delhi vide letter No. F.3/SCJ-03/AS

(UT/ 2020/4829 dated 03.11.2020.
Perused.
IO submits that charge-sheet is almost ready and shall be filed soon

before the Court.

In view of submission of IO, Ahlmad is directed to tag the

information sheet and death summary of accused alongwith
charge-sheet as and
when same is filed before the Court.

(SHIVLI TALWAR)
MM-06(CTHC/Delhi/11.12.2020
 State V/s Shahbuddin
e-FIR No. 034620/19
P.S. Sadar Bazar
U/s 379/411/34 IPC
I1.12.2020
Vide Office Order No. 1277/22595.765 DJ(HQVCovid Loekdown/ Physical Courts
Rosterl 2020 dated 25.11.2020, matters are taken up physically.
An application for release of accused on personal bond has been moved.

Present Sh.A.K. Shukla, Ld. Substitute APP for State.

Sh. Abhishek Kumar Singh, ld. LAC for
accused.
Vide order dated 08.12.2020, IO was directed to file verification
report of address of accused. Reply has been filed by I0. Same is supplied to Ld.

LAC for accused. As per the reply, form 12 of accused has been sent by Post for

the purpose of address verification, however, due to the present Covid pandemic

situation, the address of accused has not been verified yet. IO seeks further time.
Heard. IO is directed to expedite the process and file address

verification report positively by 18.12.2020.

(SHIVLI TALWAR)
MM-06(CTHC/Delhi/11.12.2020
 e.FIR No.000400/2019
PS Sadar Bazar
U/s 379 IPC
11.12.2020
Vide Office Order No. 1277/22595-765
DJ(HOVCovid
Lockdown/
taken
Physical Courts Rosterl 2020 dated 25.11.2020, matters
are up physically.

Present Sh. A.K. Shukla, Ld. Substitute APP for the State.
IO ASI Mukesh Kumar in
person.
Complainant namely Mr. Feroz Ahmed in person.
An application seeking status report has been filed by
by
complainant.
As per reply filed by 1O ASI Mukesh Kumar, untrace report in
the present case has been prepared. IO submits that he seeks time to file
the same in Court and he shall file the same tomorrow i.e. 12.12.2020.

Heard
In view of the submissions made by the IO, accordingly, put up
for 18.01.2021.

(SHIVLI TALWAR)
MM-06(C)/THCIDelhi/11.12.2020
 State V/s Aas Mohd. Etc.
FIR No. 189/18
P.S. Civil Lines

U/s 429 IPC& 11A PCA AAct

11.12.2020
Vide Office Order No. 1277/22595-765 DJ(HQJCovid Lockdown/ Physical courts
Rosterl 2020 dated 25.11.2020, matters are taken up physically.

Present Sh.A.K. Shukla, Ld. Substitute APP for State.

Sh. Neeraj Sharma, Ld. Counsel for the applicant.

Since reply has not been filed by IO concerned, let fresh notice be

issued to IO concerned to file reply to the present application for 18.12.2020.

(SHIVLI TALWAR)
MM-06(C)/THC/Delhi/11.12.2020
 State V/s Ajay @ Anta
State Vs Vijay @ Lala
e-FIR No. 0395/220
P.S. Civil Lines
U/s 379/34 IPC
11.12.2020
Courts
Vide Office Order No. 1277/22595-765 DJ(HOJCovid Lockdown/ Physica
are taken up
Roster/ 2020 dated 25.11.2020, matters
physicaly.
Present Sh.A.K. Shukla, Ld. Substitute APP for
IO ASI Gulzar Hussain in State
person.
On 10.12.2020, 1O had moved an application for issuance of production warrants

against the accused persons namely, Ajay @ Anta and Vijay@ Lala.
Oday, 1O has submitted that inadvertently he had filed an application for
ISsuance of production warrants against both the above said accused persons and he seeks to

withdraw the same

Heard. In view of submissions made by 1O, application for issuance of production
warrants against the above said accused persons is dismissed as withdrawn.

At this stage, 1o has moved an application for release of accused persons

namely, Ajay Anta & Vijay @Lala. It is stated by the 1O that the accused persons were
arrested on 30.10.2020 in this case, however, neither recovery has been effected nor co-
accused namely, Jai has been apprehended. It is further stated that the complainant has failed
to identity both the accused persons during TIP proceedings., hence, TIP of both the accused
persons has failed. It is thus prayed by the 1O that as there is no incriminating material against
the both accused persons, they may be released in this case.
Ld. APP for the State has no objection to the application.
Heard. Since no incriminating material has been found against the both accused as per
the lO and IO himself has moved an application for release of both accused on the ground that

both accused are no longer required in the present case. Hence, accused Ajay @Anta s/o Sh.

Bhawanideen & Vijay @ Lala slo Sh. Ram Singh be released forthwith, if not in
required any
other case.
IO is at liberty to take appropriate steps in case any incriminating evidence is
found against both the accused persons.
Application stands disposed of accordingly.
Copy of this order be given dasti to 10.
One copy of the order be uploaded on Delhi District Court Website. Copy of order
be also sent to the e-mail of jail superintendent and SHO PS Civil
Lines/Sadar Bazar. /
(SHIVLI TLWAR)
MM-06(C)THCIDelhil11.12.2020
 State V/s Sanju @ Kamal
FIRNo. 222120
P.S. Sadiar Bazar
U/s 380/A11/454/3A IPC
11.12.2020
Vide Office Order No. 1277122595-765
DHOJCovd Lochdown! Physieal Cout
Rosterl 2020 dated
25.11.2020, matters are taken up physically,
nis Is second bail application U/s 437 Cr.PC. moved on behall o

applicant/accused Sanju Kamal s/o Sh. Om Prakash.

Present Sh.A.K. Shukla, Ld. Substitute APP for State.
Sh. Mukul Gupta, Id. Counsel for applicant/accused.
IS submitted by Ld. Counsel for applicant/accused hat

applicantaccused is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present

case. It is submitted by Ld. Counsel for applicant/accused that applicantaccused
has been lifted from his house and arrested in the present case on the disclosure
statement of co-accused Vicky. It is further submitted that the alleged incident
took place in the month of March, however, recovery has been effected in the

month of October which points out that applicant/accused has been falsely
implicated in the present matter. It is further submitted that no recovery has been
made from or at the instance of the applicant/accused and the alleged recovery
has been planted by the police. Ld. Counsel for applicant/accused seeks grant of
bail to the applicant/accused on the ground of parity since co-accused persons
Gaurav and Rahul have already been granted bail by this Court. It is further
submitted that the past antecedents of the applicant/accused are clean and he is
not a previous convict. It is further submitted that the applicant/accused is in J/C
since 20.10.2020 and investigation qua him is already complete and he is no
more required for any custodial interrogation. It is further submitted that the
applicant/accused is the sole bread earner of his family and his wife is 8 months
pregnant. Therefore, it has been prayed that the applicant/accused be released
on bail.
Reply of 1O has been filed electronically. Copy of same has been
t to Ld. Counsel for the applicant/accused electronically. Perusal of the same
 Sadar Bazar
FIR No. 222/20 PS
-2

on the basis
was arrested in the present FIR
reveals that the applicant/accused
case property
of disclosure statement of
his co-accused, Vicky @ Punjabi and
recovered from him. It is stated that the
one iron rod (gattar) was
i.e.
and he
commission of the offence
applicantaccused played an active role in the
against the
criminal cases. It is stated that the allegation
is previously involved in

applicantaccused is specific and grave in nature.

on the ground
that
opposed the bail application
Ld. APP for State has
of the
has been recovered from the possession
the case property bail application of
further submitted that
applicant/accused. It is dated order
dismissed by Ld. Sessions Court vide
applicant/accused has been
of offence
B 12.11.2020. It is further submitted that the
time gap between the date
ot criteria for enlarging the
applicant/accused
and date of recovery is not a sufficient
habitual offender
on bail. It is further submitted
that the applicant/accused is a
ou commit similar offences
and previouslyinvolved in many criminal cases and may

again, if released on bail.

consideration to the facts and circumstances
I have given thoughtful
record in light of submissions made before
of the case and carefully perused the
me.
submissions made and the circumstances that
Considering the
been effected, co-accused persons namely, Gaurav and
recovery has already
Rahul have been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 26.11.2020
already
& 23.11.2020
respectively, investigation qua the applicant/accused is almost
custodial
complete and applicant/accused is no more required for any
interrogation, I am of the considered view that no purpose would be served by

keeping the applicant/accused behind bars. Hence, applicant/accused is

admitted to bail subject to furnishing of personal bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/-

with one surety of like amount, to the satisfaction of ld. Duty MM as per prevailing
duty roster, subject to the following conditions:
 FIR No. 222/20 PS Sadar Bazar
-3

1. That the accused person(s) shall join investigation as

when called.
. That the accused person(s) shall attend the Court as per

conditions of bond to be executed.

offence
3. That the accused person(s) shall not commit similar

and;
4. That the accused person(s) shall not
directlylindirectly induce,

or in any way dissuade the witnesses/persons

give threat,
case and also shall not tamper
acquainted with the facts of the

with the evidence.

is off.
Accordingly, the present application disposed
Website.
on Delhi District Court
One copy of the order be uploaded
PS Civil
e-mail of jail superintendent and SHO
Copy of order be also sent to the
the
Bazar and Ld. Counsel for the applicant. The printout of
Lines/Sadar
the final
be kept for records and be tagged with
application, reply and order

report
(SHIVLI TALWAR)
MM-06(C)/THC/Delhi/11.12.2020
 State V/s Tinku Sharma
e-FIR No. 27933/20
P.S. Civil Lines
U/s 379/411/34 IPC
11.12.2020
Vide Office Order No. 1277/22595-765 DI(HQJJCOvid Lockdown/ Physical Courts

Roster/ 2020 dated 25.11.2020, matters are taken up

physically.
The present application for grant of bail U/s 437 Cr.P.C. has been moved on

behalf of applicant/accused Tinku Sharma s/o Sh. Rakesh Sharma.

Present Sh. A.K. Shukla, Ld. Substitute APP for State.
Sh. Parvez Alam, ld. Counsel for applicant/accused.
It is submitted by Ld. Counsel for applicant/accused that
case. t is
applicant/accused is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present
Turther Submitted that no recovery has been made from or at the instance ot the

applicant/accused and the alleged recovery has been planted by the police. It is further

submitted that co-accused told the name of applicant/accused in disclosure statement

in a drunken condition. Ld. Counsel for applicant/accused prays for grant of bail to the

applicant/accused on the ground of parity since co-accused Sumit has already granted
bail by this Court. It is further submitted that the applicant/accused is a young boy aged
22 years, belongs to a poor family and is the sole bread earner of his family. It is
submitted that the past antecedents of the applicant/accused are clean and he has not
been previously involved in any other case. It is further submitted that the
applicant/accused is in JC since 05.11.2020 and investigation qua him is already
complete and he is no more required for any custodial interrogation. Therefore, it has
been prayed that the applicant/accused be released on bail
Reply of I1O has been filed electronically. Copy of same has been sent to
Ld. Counsel for the applicant/accused electronically. Perusal of the same reveals that
recovery of the stolen vehicle has been made from the applicant/accused and his
co-accused, Sumit. It is stated that accused is previously involved in many theft cases
and he may commit similar offences again, if released on bail.
Ld. substitute APP for the State has opposed the bail application on the
ground that the case property has been recovered from possession of

applicant/accused. It is further submitted that applicant/accused is a habitual offender

and he may commit similar offences again, if released on bail.
2020

Lines
27933/20 PS Civil
FIR No.

-2
circumstances
of the
facts and
consideration to the
have given thoughtful before me.
made
submissions
that no
the record in light of
carefully perused I am of the view
c a s e and case,
circumstances of the as
facts and bars anymore
In the given behind the
the applicant already
be served by keeping vehicle has
userui purpose would stolen
recovery
of the
and a d m i t e d to
almost complete is
investigation qua him is applicant/accused
allowed and like
the application is the
Hence, with one surety in
been e f e c t e d . Rs.15,000/-
the s u m of thee
bond in subject to
of personal roster,
bail on furnishing prevailing duty
Ld. Duty MM a s per
satisfaction of
a m o u n t to the

as and w h e n
following conditions investigation
accused person(s) shall join
1. That the

called. Court a
ass per
attend the
shall
the accused person(s)
2. That
executed.
conditions of bond to be and;
similar offence
shall not commit
accused person()
3. That the induce,
not directlylindirectly
accused person(s) shall
4. That the acquainted
the witnesses/persons
dissuade
or in any way
give threat, with the evidence.
the case and also shall not tamper
with the facts of
off.
the present application is disposed
Accordingly, of order
on Delhi District Court VWebsite. Copy
order be uploaded
One copy of the Lines/Sadar Bazar
superintendent and SHO PS Civil
e-mail of jail
be also sent to the order be
The printout of the application, reply and
the applicant.
and Ld. Counsel for
final report. (
and be tagged with the
kept for records (SHIVLI TALWAR)
MM-06(C)/THC/Delhil11.12.2020
 State Vs. Shahabuddin
e.FIR No.034620/2019
PS Sadar Bazar
Uls 379/411/34 IPC
08.12.2020
Vide Office Order No. 1277/22595-765 DJ(HO)/Covid
Lockdown/ Physical Courts Roster/ 2020 dated 25.11.2020, the cases
are being taken
up through Video Conferencing today.

Joined through Video conferencing on Cisco WebeX.

This is an application for releasing the accused on personal
bond.
Present: Ld. APP for the State (through V.C.).
Mr. Abhishek Kumar Singh, Ld. LAC for the accused has joined
through V.C.
IO was directed to file verification report vide order dated

01.12.2020, however, the same has not been filed yet.

Let notice be issued to the IO concerned to file the verification

report, through SHO concerned, for the NDOH.

SHO COncerned is directed to ensure that the verification
report
is filed on the NDOH.

Put up on 11.12.2020.

(SHIVLI TALWAR)
MM-06(C)ITHCIDelhi/08.12.2020
 Mukesh
Bokha
State V/s FIR No. 515/20
P.S. Civil Lines
Act
U/s 33 Delhi Excise
11.12.2020
Lockdown/ Physical Courts
Vide Office Order No. 1277/22595-765 DJ(HQJCovid
Rosterl 2020 dated 25.11.2020, matters are taken up physically.
n e present application for grant of bail U/s 437 Cr.P.C. has been moved on

behalf of applicant/accused Mukesh @ Bokha s/o Late Ant Ram.

Present: Sh. A.K. Shukla, Ld. Substitute APP for State.

Sh. S.P. Sharma, ld. Counsel for applicant/accused.

for applicant/accused that
It is submitted by Ld. Counsel
in the present case. It
applicant/accused is innocent and has been falsely implicated
IS further submitted that no recovery has been made from or at the instance of the

It is
applicant/accused and the allegedrecovery has been planted by the police.
further submitted that the applicant/accused is in J/C since 22.11.2020. It is further

submitted that the applicant/accused is a married man with the responsibility to

maintain three children, his wife is admitted in the hospital and he is the sole bread
earner of his family. It is submitted that the applicant/accused has been acquitted in

11 out of 17 cases mentioned in the previous involvement report filed by the IO and
he has not been previously involved in any other case under the Delhi Excise Act. It

is submitted that the applicant/accused was called to the police station from his
nouse and falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that there is
no public witness in the present case and the only witnesses to the alleged incident
are police officials. It is further submitted that whereabouts of applicant/accused
have been duly verified, hence, there are no chances of the applicant/accused
absconding. It is further submitted that since only police officials are witnesses in the
present case, hence, there are no chances of the applicantaccused threatening/
intimidating the witnesses. It is further submitted that even otherwise, the alleged
recovery has already been effected and further custodial interrogation of the
applicant/accused is no more required. Therefore, it has been prayed that the
applicant/accused be released on bail.
Reply of IO has been filed electronically. Copy of same has been sent
 -2 FIR No.515/20 PS Civil Lines

Ounsel
for the applicant/accused electronically. Perusal of the same reveais
udl200 quarter bottles of illicit liauor were
recovered from the possession or
applicanUaccused. It is stated that the applicant/accused brought illicit liquor rom
ndiyana to supply the same in Delhi. It is stated that the is a
applicantaccused B
of PS Civil Lines and is involved in 17 other criminal cases.
Ld. substitute APP for the State has opposed the bail application on the

grOund that 200 quarter bottles of illicit liquor have been recovered from tne

possession of the applicant/accused. It is submitted that the applicantaccused is a

habitual offender and has been involved in 17 cases from the year 1994 to 2020,
which includes one case under the Delhi Excise Act also. It is further submitted that
the applicant/accused may commit further offences, if released on bail. Therefore, it

has been prayed that applicant/accused should not be released on bail.

on the bail I have
Arguments heard application from both the sides.
perused the contents of the application and perused the reply filed by IO.
In the present case, the allegation against the applicant/accused is

under the Delhi Excise Act for being found in illegal possession of illicit liquor. It is

observed that this Court has dismissed the bail application of applicant/accused vide

order dated 28.11.2020. No change of circumstance since then has been pointed by

entitling the applicanttaccused to be released on

Ld. Counsel for applicant/accused,
that the
bail. Considering the antecedents of the applicant/accused and the fact
investigation of the case is still at a nascent stage, this Court is not inclined to grant

bail to the applicant/accused at this stage. Hence, the present bail application is
hereby dismissed.

Accordingly, the present application is disposed off.

One copy of the order be uploaded on Delhi District Court Website.

sent to the e-mail of jail superintendent and SHO PS Civil

Copy of order be also
Lines/Sadar Bazar and Ld. Counsel for the applicant. The printout of the application,
reply and order be kept for records and be tagged with the final report. /
(SHIVLTALWAR)
MM-06(C)/THC/Delh/11.12.2020
 FIR NO. 348/20
P.S. Sadar Bazar
U/s 457/380/411/34 IPC
11.12.2020
VIde Office Order No. 1277/22595-765 DJ(HOJCovid Lockdowní Physical Courts
Rosterl 2020 dated
25.11.2020, matters are taken up physically.
San application for releasing_of case property _(i.e. coin, currency, electrical and
Cgods (Delllaptopblackcolourservices Tag No. GBHXYL2and jewelleryi
Sumsung Tab) on superdari filed by applicant Sh. Badri Vishal Shukla.
Present Sh. A.K. Shukla, Ld. Substitute APP for State.
Applicant in person with Ld. Counsel.
Reply filed by the IO. Same is take on record. As per the reply, O has no

ODection to the release of laptop make Dell and Samsung Tab as 1O submits that they are no
Onger required for investigation purpose. However, 1O has objection to the release of tWo Silver

coins to the applicant since TIP of the two silver coins is fixed for 14.12.2020.

Heard. In view of reply of 1O, the application stands partly allowed. I am of the
considered view that laptop make Dell and Samsung Tab be released to the applicant.
Instead of releasing the laptop make Dell and Samsung Tab on superdari, I am of
the considered view that the same has to be released as per directions of Hon'ble Supreme
Court in case titled as "Sunder Bhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujrat, AIR 2003 SC 638.
The view of the Hon'ble Supreme Court has been reiterated by Hon'ble High Court
of Delhi in case titled as "Manjit Singh Vs. State in Crl. M.C. No. 4485/2013 dated
10.09.2014.
Considering the facts and circumstances and law laid down by higher courts
laptop make Dell and Samsung Tab be released to the applicant/registered owner on furnishing
security bond/indemnity bond as per valuation report of the laptop make Dell and Samsung Tab.
IO is directed to get the valuation done of the laptop make Dell and Samsung Tab prior to
releasing the same to the applicant/registered Owner as per directions of Hon'ble Supreme
Court. Coloured photographs and punchnama of laptop make Dell and Samsung Tab in
question be conducted as per above mentioned judgments.
Copy of this order be given dasti to the applicant. Punchnama alongwith
photographs, valuation report etc shall be filed in the Court alongwith final report.
One copy of order be uploaded on CIS. Copy of order be also sent to the e-mail
of SHO Ps Civil Lines/Sadar Bazar and Ld. Counsel for the applicant/applicant.

(SHIVLI TALWAR)
MM-06(C)/THC/Delhi/11.12.2020
 State V/s Anuj
FIR No. 342/20
P.S. Civil Lines
Act
U/s 25/54/59 Arms
11.12.2020
Courts
Vide Office Order No. 1277/22595-765 DJ(HQVCovid Lockdown/ Physical
Rosterl 2020 dated 25.11.2020, matters are taken up physically.

Present Sh.A.K. Shukla, Ld. Substitute APP for State.

Sana-Ur-
Ms. Kiran, applicant in person alongwith Ld. LAC Sh.
Reman.
None for the accused.

Since the accused has not appeared in the Court today, let fresh
notice be issued to accused to appear before the Court in person on 17.12.2020

(physical hearing date)

(SHIVLI TALWAR)
MM-06(C)/THC/Delhi/11.12.2020
 State V/s Mohd. Rehan &
Ors.
FIR No. 204/19
P.S. Sadar Bazar
U/s 308/34 IPC
11.12.2020
Lockdown/ Physical Courts
Vide Office Order No. 1277/22595-765 DJ(HQ]/Covid
Roster/ 2020 dated 25.11.2020, matters are taken up physically.
Furkan
This is an application moved on behalf of applicant/accused Mohd.
for release of the jamatalashi articles.
State.
Present: Sh. A.K. Shukla, Ld. Substitute APP for
Sh. Arvind Kumar, ld. Counsel for applicant.
the present application, despite
being
IO has still not filed reply to
do so.
given two opportunities to
that reply to the present
directed to ensure
Accordingly, SHO is
IO 14.12.2020. Shondi
application is filed by on
(SHIVLI TALWARR)
MM-06(C)/THC/Delhi/11.12.2020
 State Vs. Sumit
U/s 392/394/34 IPC
FIR No.320/2020
PS Civil Lines

11.12.2020
Vide Office Order No. 1277/22595-765 DJ(HOJCovid
Lockdown/ Physical Courts Rosterl 2020 dated 25.11.2020, matter is
taken up through video conferencing on Cisco Webex.

Present Sh. A.K. Shukla, Ld. Substitute APP for the State.
Sh. Nitin Gupta, Ld. Counsel for the accused has joined the

V.C.
An application for surrender of accused Sumit has been moved

by Ld. Counsel.
Ld. Counsel for accused has submitted that the accused was

granted interim bail on 09.11.2020 by this Court, which was further

extended by Ld. Sessions Court till 07.12.2020, pursuant to which the
Court ordered the accused to surrender before the concerned authorities.
It is submitted that on 07.12.2020, accused went to Tihar Jail to surrender
before the authorities but the jail authorities refused to take him into
custody on the ground that after 8:00 PM, they do not take any new under
trial in custody and asked him to surrender before the Court.
At this stage, Ld. Counsel for accused has moved an
application for extension of time of surrender of accused/ extension of
interim bail of accused on the ground that the accused was found COVID-
19 positive on 09.12.2020 after having been tested at the Government Van
at Sheikh Sarai and advised 17 days home isolation till 27.12.2020.
Ld. Substitute APP for the State has opposed the present
of
application for extension of time of surrender of accused/ extension
interim bail of accused on the ground that there have been many instances
Contd.....2-
 fake
COVID-19 reports being prepared.
of
Heard. Record perused.

The interim bail of accused was extended till 07.12.2020 by the

d. ASJ, Sh. Sanjay Sharma-ll. Thus, this Court does not deem it fit to
further extend the interim bail granted by the Ld. Sessions Court, hence,
the accused is at liberty to approach the Ld. Sessions Court for extension
of interim bail.

However, Ld. Counsel for accused prays for interim protection

for a period of two days until he files an application for extension of interim
bail before the Ld. Sessions Court.

Heard.
In view of submission made by Ld. Counsel for accused that

accused is COVID-19 positive and has been advised 17

days home
isolation and in view of prayer that interim protection be to accused granted
for two days in order to file an application for its extension before the Ld.
Sessions Court, the accused is granted interim bail for
2 days till
13.12.2020.
IO concerned is directed to verify the COVID-19 report of
accused and file report on 14.12.2020.
The present applications stand disposed off accordingly.

(SHIVLI TALWAR)
MM-06(C)THCIDelhil11.12.2020