IN THE MATTER OF :-
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
F.I.R. No. FIR number
U/S: Sections of FIR
P.S.: Police station
I N D E X
| S.NO. | PARTICULARS | PAGES | C.FEE |
| 5. | PETITION UNDER SECTION 439(2) READ WITH SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. WITH AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT. | | |
| 6. | ANNEXURE P-1: TRUE TYPED COPY OF FIR No.FIR number. | | |
| 7. | ANNEXURE P-2: COPY OF ORDER DATED Date of bail order PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN BAIL APPLICATION NO.Bail application number. | | |
| 8. | APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING CERTIFIED COPY, WITH AFFIDAVIT. | | |
DELHIPETITIONER
THROUGH
DATED: Date of signing
ADVOCATES
Advocate's chamber/address, Delhi-110054.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. MISC. MAIN No. Criminal misc. main case number OF 2017
IN THE MATTER OF :-
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
F.I.R. No. FIR number
U/S: Sections of FIR
P.S.: Police station
URGENT APPLICATION
TO,
THE HON'BLE JOINT REGISTRAR,
HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
NEW DELHI.
SIR,
It is most respectfully prayed that the accompanying petition may kindly be treated as urgent in accordance with the Rules and Regulations of the Hon'ble High Court. The ground of urgency is as follows:-
To cancel the bail granted to Respondents No. 2 and 3 by this Hon'ble Court in Bail Application No.Bail application number vide order dated Date of bail order in FIR No.FIR number, P.S. Police station, under Sections 452/323/34 of the IPC, in the interest of justice.
DELHIPETITIONER
THROUGH
DATED: Date of signing
ADVOCATES
Advocate's chamber/address, Delhi-110054.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. MISC. MAIN No. Criminal misc. main case number OF 2017
IN THE MATTER OF :-
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
F.I.R. No. FIR number
U/S: 452/323/34 IPC
P.S.: Police station
MEMO OF PARTIES
Petitioner's name
Petitioner's address,
New Delhi-110005.: PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. Respondent 1's name
2.----------------------
3. Respondent 3's name
Respondents' address,
New Delhi-110008.: RESPONDENTS
DELHIPETITIONER
THROUGH
DATED: Date of signing
ADVOCATES
Advocate's chamber/address, Delhi-110054.
Petitioner's name Vs. Respondent's name
FIR No. FIR number
P.S.: Police station
U/S: 452/323/34 IPC
Pending in the Trial court name, Delhi.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. MISC. MAIN No. Criminal misc. main case number OF 2017
IN THE MATTER OF :-
Petitioner's name
Petitioner's address,
New Delhi-110005.: PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. Respondent 1's name
2. Respondent 2's name
S/o Respondent 2's father's name
3. Respondent 3's name
Respondents' address,
New Delhi-110008.: RESPONDENTS
F.I.R. No. FIR number
U/S: 452/323/34 IPC
P.S.: Police station
PETITION ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER UNDER SECTION 439(2) READ WITH SECTION 482 OF THE CR.P.C. SEEKING CANCELLATION OF THE BAIL OF RESPONDENTS NO. 2 AND 3 / ACCUSED, NAMELY Respondent 2's first name Respondent 2's surname AND Respondent 3's name, WHO HAVE BEEN GRANTED BAIL BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN BAIL APPLICATION NO.Bail application number VIDE ORDER DATED Date of bail order.
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH :-
1.That the present petition has been filed by the Petitioner seeking cancellation of the bail granted to Respondents No. 2 and 3 by this Hon'ble Court in Bail Application No.Bail application number in FIR No.FIR number, P.S. Police station, under Sections 452/323/34 of the IPC, vide order dated Date of bail order.
2.The grounds upon which cancellation of bail is sought, and which require consideration in the present petition, are as follows:-
(a)Whether this Hon'ble Court scrutinised the testimony of the witnesses at the stage of hearing of the bail application?
(b)Whether the Court, while granting bail to Respondents No. 2 and 3 in the present case under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code, ought to have indicated the reasons for which the bail was being granted?
(c)While granting bail to the accused persons, this Hon'ble Court imposed the condition that they shall not visit the residential premises of the parents / complainants (the Petitioner herein); notwithstanding the said condition, the accused threatened the Petitioner with dire consequences if she did not withdraw the present FIR.
3. That the brief facts of the present petition are as follows :-
(A)That the Petitioner resides at the address mentioned above; Respondent No. 1 is the son of the Petitioner, and Respondent No. 2 is the wife of Respondent No. 1. The said Respondents have been residing separately from the Petitioner owing to family disputes which are also pending before the Courts below.
(B)That on Date of incident, at around Time of incident p.m., the Respondents, along with certain other persons, forcibly entered the house of the Petitioner. Prior to coming to her house, they used filthy language and abused the Petitioner over the telephone. On entering the house, they began to beat the Petitioner, snatched her gold chain, and ran away while abusing her in filthy language, stating that no one could stop them, that they would come again, and that they had no fear of the police or the law.
(C)Thereafter, the Petitioner called the 100 number, and the police reached the spot, whereupon the present FIR was registered against them. It is submitted that the Petitioner and her husband had debarred Respondents No. 2 and 3 from their movable and immovable properties.
(D)That the families are not on talking terms, much less on visiting terms. The civil dispute with regard to the probate of the Will is pending before Probate court name, Delhi.
(E)Upon filing of the charge-sheet, the Ld. Trial Court was pleased to frame charges against Respondents No. 2 and 3 under Sections 452/323/34 of the IPC.
(F)It is submitted that Respondents No. 2 and 3 were granted bail by this Hon'ble Court, after the aforesaid FIR was registered under Sections 452/323/34 of the Indian Penal Code, vide order dated Date of bail order.
4.That this Hon'ble Court, vide order dated Date of bail order, was pleased to grant bail to Respondents No. 2 and 3, which is being challenged in the present petition on the following grounds:-
GROUNDS :-
(A)That the Petitioner has filed a probate case for the probate of the Will executed by her husband. Respondent No. 2 filed objections to the probate case and has even gone to the extent of levelling wild allegations of the murder of the husband of the Petitioner.
(B)That Respondent No. 2 posted objectionable remarks on Facebook against the Petitioner and her husband, going so far as to state: "MERE MAA BAAP JEET OR MAI UNKA PIND DAN KARTA HU".
(C)That another FIR, bearing No.Other FIR number, under Sections 354/506/427 of the IPC, P.S. Other police station, was lodged by the maid servant of the Petitioner, wherein Respondent No. 2 was involved in the molestation of the maid servant.
(D)Because the relationship of Respondents No. 2 and 3 with the Petitioner has been strained since the year 2010, during the lifetime of Sh. Petitioner's late husband's name, and a number of complaints and FIRs were lodged against Respondents No. 2 and 3.
(E)That the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 2011 (6) SCC 189, Prabhu Dayal Deorah — "Prakash Kadam Vs. Ram Prasad Vishwanath & Anr.", held that "in considering the question whether to cancel the bail given to an accused, the Court has to consider the gravity and nature of the offence and in case there are very serious allegations against the accused the bail can be cancelled even if the accused had not misused the liberty of bail granted to him".
F.For that Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are violating the terms of the bail granted by this Hon'ble Court vide order dated Date of bail order.
G.For that Respondents Nos. 2 and 3 threatened the complainant / petitioner with dire consequences if she did not withdraw the FIR lodged against Respondents Nos. 2 and 3.
H.For that Respondents Nos. 2 and 3 visited the house of the petitioner / complainant and threatened her.
I.For that the Ld. Trial Court ought not to have ignored the testimony of the eye-witnesses who gave ocular evidence qua the incident.
J.For that expert evidence has two aspects, namely, data evidence and opinion evidence. While it is undoubtedly true that data evidence cannot be rejected if it is inconsistent with oral evidence, so far as opinion evidence is concerned, it is only an inference drawn from the data, and such evidence would not get precedence over direct eye-witness testimony unless, of course, the inconsistency between the two is so great as to obviously falsify the oral evidence; further, the value of medical evidence is only corroborative.
K.For that the Court is not required to scrutinise the testimony of the witnesses at the stage of hearing of a bail application.
L.For that while granting bail in serious offences, the Court ought to indicate reasons as to why bail is being granted, failing which the order would prejudice the complainant.
M.For that while granting bail to the Respondents, the Court failed to consider that they are in a position to influence the witnesses in this case and to thwart the course of justice.
N.That the order granting bail to the Respondents is wholly bad in law, is detrimental to the aforesaid case, and will thwart the course of justice in the aforesaid case.
O.That the order dated Date of bail order granting bail to the Respondents, passed without considering the aforesaid material facts and without considering the gravity of the offence, is totally erroneous and contrary to the law and guidelines settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India as well as the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi.
P.Because the Court failed to appreciate the relevant material and instead considered irrelevant material while granting bail.
Q.That the Ld. Court failed to appreciate, while granting bail to the Respondents, that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (Crl.) No.6139/2006, titled "Raj Kumar Maheshwari Vs. Jyoti Gutpa & Anr.", vide its order dated 07.05.2007 cancelling the bail of the accused, observed as under:
"The challenge in this appeal is to the order dated 28.08.2006 passed by the High Court granting bail to the respondent-accused subject to her furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.
The respondent alongwith others is an accused under Section 420 read with 120-B IPC. The amount involved in this case is Rs.1,30,00,000/-. We have gone through the impugned order passed by the High Court and no reason has been assigned in the order as to why the bail should be granted in such a serious nature of offence.
It is settled law that while granting bail in a non-bailable offence the primary consideration is the gravity and the nature of the offence. It appears that the High Court has not at all considered the gravity and the nature of the offence while granting bail to the respondent-accused:"
5.In view of the aforesaid facts and law, the Court, while granting bail to the Respondents vide order dated Date of bail order, neither considered the undisputed facts available on record, nor considered the gravity of the offence, nor considered the conduct of the accused; as such, the impugned order, being bad in law, is liable to be set aside.
6.That no similar petition for cancellation of bail has been filed by the petitioner / complainant before this Hon'ble Court, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, or any other Court.
P R A Y E R
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to:
a.Set aside the order dated Date of bail order passed by this Hon'ble Court in Bail Application No.Bail application number in FIR No.FIR number registered at P.S. Police station under Sections 452/323/34 of IPC;
b.Cancel the bail granted to Respondents Nos. 2 and 3 by this Hon'ble Court vide order dated Date of bail order and direct that they be taken into custody in the aforesaid case, in the interest of justice;
c.Pass such further order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper, in the interest of justice.
Place of signingPETITIONER
THROUGH
DATED: Date of signing
ADVOCATES
Chamber No. Advocate's chamber/address
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. MISC. APPLICATION NO. Criminal misc. application number OF 2017
IN
CRL. MISC. MAIN No. Criminal misc. main case number OF 2017
IN THE MATTER OF:
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Mrs. Deponent's name, aged about Deponent's age years, W/o Deponent's husband's name, R/o Deponent's address, opposite Landmark near deponent's address, New Delhi-110005, who do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:
1.That I am the Petitioner / Complainant in the above-noted case and, as such, in that capacity I am well conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case and competent to depose hereunder.
2.That the Applicant has gone through the averments made in the accompanying application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., seeking exemption from filing certified copies, and submits that this application has been drafted by my counsel on my instructions and on the facts as briefed by me.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION
Verified at Delhi on this Date of affidavit verification that the facts stated in the above Affidavit are true to my knowledge, no part of the same is false, and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. MISC. MAIN No. Criminal misc. main case number OF 2017
IN THE MATTER OF:
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Deponent's name, aged about Deponent's age years, W/o Deponent's husband's name, R/o Deponent's address, New Delhi-110005, who do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:
1.That I am the Petitioner / Complainant in the above-noted case and, as such, in that capacity I am well conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case and competent to depose hereunder.
2.That the contents of the accompanying petition under Section 439(2) r/w Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. have been drafted by my counsel as per my instructions, and the contents thereof have been duly read over and explained to me in my vernacular language, and after fully understanding the contents thereof, I state that the same are true and correct to my knowledge.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION
Verified at Delhi on this Date of affidavit verification that the facts stated in the above Affidavit are true to my knowledge, no part of the same is false, and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. MISC. APPLICATION NO. Criminal misc. application number OF 2017
IN
CRL. MISC. MAIN No. Criminal misc. main case number OF 2017
IN THE MATTER OF:
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
THE STATE & ORS.: RESPONDENTS
F.I.R. No. FIR number
U/S: 452/323/34 IPC
P.S.: Police station
APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING CERTIFIED COPIES OF THE ANNEXURES
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
1.That the Petitioner has filed annexures along with the main petition in support of the petition, and the Description of annexures filed filed therewith are true, correct and compared copies of the originals.
2.That the Petitioner shall apply for obtaining the certified copies of the Annexures for which certified copies to be obtained and undertakes to file the same as soon as they are made available by the copying agency concerned.
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to exempt the Petitioner from filing the certified copies of the Annexures for which exemption sought.
DELHIPETITIONER
THROUGH
DATED: Date of signing
Advocate's chamber/address, PIN code of advocate's chamber address.
ADVOCATES
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. MISC. MAIN No. Criminal misc. main case number OF Year of the criminal misc. main case number.
IN THE MATTER OF :-
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
F.I.R. No. FIR number
U/S.: Sections of FIR
P.S.: Police station
I N D E X
| S.NO. | PARTICULARS | PAGES | C.FEE |
|---|
| 1. | NOTICE OF MOTION | | |
| 5. | PETITION UNDER SECTION 439(2) READ WITH SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. WITH AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT. | | |
| 6. | ANNEXURE P-1: TRUE TYPED COPY OF FIR No. FIR number. | | |
| 7. | ANNEXURE P-2: COPY OF ORDER DATED Date of bail order PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN BAIL APPLICATION NO. Bail application number. | | |
| 8. | APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING CERTIFIED COPY, WITH AFFIDAVIT. | | |
DELHIPETITIONER
THROUGH
DATED: Date of signing
Advocate's chamber/address, PIN code of advocate's chamber address.
ADVOCATES
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. MISC. MAIN No. Criminal misc. main case number OF Year of the criminal misc. main case number.
IN THE MATTER OF :-
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
F.I.R. No. FIR number
U/S.: Sections of FIR
P.S.: Police station
URGENT APPLICATION
TO,
THE HON'BLE JOINT REGISTRAR,
HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
NEW DELHI.
SIR,
It is most respectfully requested that the accompanying petition may kindly be treated as urgent in accordance with the Rules and Regulations of the Hon'ble High Court. The ground of urgency is as under:-
To cancel the bail granted to Respondents No. 2 and 3 by this Hon'ble Court in Bail Application No. Bail application number vide order dated Date of bail order in FIR No. FIR number, P.S. Police station, under Sections 452/323/34 of the Indian Penal Code, in the interest of justice.
DELHIPETITIONER
THROUGH
DATED: Date of signing
Advocate's chamber/address, PIN code of advocate's chamber address.
ADVOCATES
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. MISC. MAIN No. Criminal misc. main case number OF Year of the criminal misc. main case number.
IN THE MATTER OF :-
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
F.I.R. No. FIR number
U/S.: 452/323/34 IPC
P.S.: Police station
MEMO OF PARTIES
Petitioner's name
Petitioner's address: PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. Respondent 1's name
2.----------------------
3. Respondent 3's name
Respondents' address: RESPONDENTS
DELHIPETITIONER
THROUGH
DATED: Date of signing
Advocate's chamber/address, PIN code of advocate's chamber address.
ADVOCATES
Petitioner's name Vs. Respondent's name
FIR No. FIR number
P.S.: Police station
U/S.: 452/323/34 IPC
Pending in the Trial court name, Delhi.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. MISC. MAIN No. Criminal misc. main case number OF Year of the criminal misc. main case number.
IN THE MATTER OF :-
Petitioner's name
Petitioner's address: PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. Respondent 1's name
2. Respondent 2's name
S/o Respondent 2's father's name
3. Respondent 3's name
Respondents' address: RESPONDENTS
F.I.R. No. FIR number
U/S.: 452/323/34 IPC
P.S.: Police station
PETITION ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER UNDER SECTION 439(2) READ WITH SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973, SEEKING CANCELLATION OF THE BAIL OF RESPONDENTS NO. 2 AND 3 / ACCUSED, NAMELY Respondent 2's first name Respondent 2's surname AND Respondent 3's name, WHO HAVE BEEN GRANTED BAIL BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN BAIL APPLICATION NO. Bail application number VIDE ORDER DATED Date of bail order.
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:-
1.That the present petition has been filed by the Petitioner seeking cancellation of the bail of Respondents No. 2 and 3, which was granted by this Hon'ble Court in Bail Application No. Bail application number in FIR No. FIR number, P.S. Police station, under Sections 452/323/34 of the Indian Penal Code, vide order dated Date of bail order.
2.The grounds upon which cancellation of bail is sought, and which require consideration in the present petition, are:-
(a)Whether this Hon'ble Court scrutinised the testimony of the witnesses at the stage of hearing of the bail application?
(b)Whether the Court, while granting bail to Respondents No. 2 and 3 in the present case under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code, ought to have indicated the reasons why bail was being granted?
(c)This Hon'ble Court imposed a condition while granting bail to the accused persons that they would not visit the residential premises of the parents / complainants (the Petitioner herein); however, the accused also threatened the Petitioner with dire consequences if she did not withdraw the present FIR.
3. That the brief facts giving rise to the present petition are as follows:-
(A)That the Petitioner resides at the address mentioned above; Respondent No. 1 is the son of the Petitioner, and Respondent No. 2 is the wife of Respondent No. 1. They have been residing separately from the Petitioner owing to family disputes, which are also pending before the Courts below.
(B)That on Date of incident, at around Time of incident, the Respondents, along with certain other persons, forcibly entered the house of the Petitioner. They had earlier used filthy and abusive language against the Petitioner over the telephone before coming to her house, and thereafter they assaulted the Petitioner, snatched her gold chain, and ran away while abusing her in filthy language, stating that no one could stop them, that they would come again, and that they had no fear of the police or the law.
(C)Thereafter, the Petitioner telephoned the police on number 100, and the police reached the spot, upon which the present FIR was registered against them. It is submitted that the Petitioner and her husband had debarred Respondents No. 2 and 3 from their movable and immovable properties.
(D)That the two families are not on talking terms, let alone visiting each other. The civil dispute with regard to the probate of the Will is pending before Probate court name, Delhi.
(E)After the filing of the charge-sheet, the Ld. Trial Court was pleased to frame charges against Respondents No. 2 and 3 under Sections 452/323/34 IPC.
(F)It is submitted that Respondents No. 2 and 3 were granted bail by this Hon'ble Court, after the aforesaid FIR was registered under Sections 452/323/34 of the Indian Penal Code, vide order dated Date of bail order.
4.That this Hon'ble Court, vide order dated Date of bail order, was pleased to grant bail to Respondents No. 2 and 3, which order is being challenged in the present petition on the following grounds:-
GROUNDS:-
(A)That the Petitioner has filed a probate case for the probate of the Will executed by her husband. Respondent No. 2 filed objections to the probate case and has even gone to the extent of levelling wild allegations of the murder of the husband of the Petitioner.
(B)That Respondent No. 2 posted objectionable remarks on Facebook against the Petitioner and her husband, going to the extent of stating "Objectionable Facebook remark posted by Respondent No. 2".
(C)That another FIR, bearing No. Other FIR number, under Sections 354/506/427 of the Indian Penal Code, was lodged at Police Station Other police station by the maid servant of the Petitioner, wherein Respondent No. 2 was involved in the molestation of the maid servant.
(D)Because the relationship of Respondents No. 2 and 3 with the Petitioner has been strained since the year Year since which the relationship has been strained, during the lifetime of Sh. Petitioner's late husband's name, and a number of complaints and FIRs were lodged against Respondents No. 2 and 3.
E.That the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 2011 (6) SCC 189, Prashant Kadam v. Ram Prasad Vishwanath & Anr., held that “in considering the question whether to cancel the bail given to an accused, the Court has to consider the gravity and nature of the offence and in case there are very serious allegations against the accused the bail can be cancelled even if the accused had not misused the liberty of bail granted to him”.
F.That Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are violating the terms of the bail granted by this Hon'ble Court vide order dated Date of bail order.
G.That Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 threatened the complainant/petitioner with dire consequences if she did not withdraw the FIR lodged against Respondent Nos. 2 and 3.
H.That Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 visited the house of the petitioner/complainant and threatened her.
I.That the Ld. Trial Court ought not to have ignored the testimony of the eyewitnesses who gave ocular evidence regarding the incident.
J.That expert evidence has two aspects, namely, data evidence and opinion evidence. While it is undoubtedly true that data evidence cannot be rejected if it is inconsistent with oral evidence, so far as opinion evidence is concerned, it is only an inference drawn from the data, and such evidence would not take precedence over direct eyewitness testimony unless the inconsistency between the two is so great as to obviously falsify the oral evidence; further, the value of medical evidence is only corroborative.
K.That the Court is not required to scrutinise the testimony of the witnesses at the stage of hearing of a bail application.
L.That while granting bail in serious offences, reasons ought to be indicated as to why bail is being granted, otherwise the order would operate to the prejudice of the complainant.
M.That while granting bail to the Respondents, the Court failed to consider that they are in a position to influence the witnesses in this case and to thwart the course of justice.
N.That the order granting bail to the Respondents is wholly bad in law, is detrimental to the aforesaid case, and will thwart the course of justice in the aforesaid case.
O.That the order dated Date of bail order granting bail to the Respondents, passed without considering the aforesaid material facts and without considering the gravity of the offence, is wholly erroneous and contrary to the law and guidelines settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India as well as the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi.
P.Because the Court failed to appreciate the relevant material and instead considered irrelevant material while granting bail.
Q.That the Ld. Court failed to appreciate, while granting bail to the Respondents, that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (Crl.) No. 6139/2006, titled Raj Kumar Maheshwari v. Jyoti Gutpa & Anr., vide its order dated 07.05.2007 cancelling the bail of the accused, observed as under :
“The challenge in this appeal is to the order dated 28.08.2006 passed by the High Court granting bail to the respondent-accused subject to her furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.
The respondent alongwith others is an accused under Section 420 read with 120-B IPC. The amount involved in this case is Rs.1,30,00,000/-. We have gone through the impugned order passed by the High Court and no reason has been assigned in the order as to why the bail should be granted in such a serious nature of offence.
It is settled law that while granting bail in non-bailable offence the primary consideration is the gravity and the nature of the offence. It appears that the High Court has not at all considered the gravity and the nature of the offence while granting bail to the respondent-accused:”
5.In view of the aforesaid facts and law, the Court, while granting bail to the Respondents vide order dated Date of bail order, neither considered the undisputed facts available on record, nor the gravity of the offence, nor the conduct of the accused; as such, the impugned order, being bad in law, is liable to be set aside.
6.No similar petition for cancellation of bail has been filed by the petitioner/complainant before any other Court, nor before this Hon'ble Court or the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.
P R A Y E R
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to :
a.Set aside the order dated Date of bail order passed by this Hon'ble Court in Bail Application No. Bail application number in FIR No. FIR number, P.S. Police station, under Sections Sections of the IPC in the FIR of the IPC;
b.Cancel the bail granted to Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 by this Hon'ble Court vide order dated Date of bail order and direct that they be taken into custody in the aforesaid case, in the interest of justice;
c.Pass such further order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper, in the interest of justice.
DELHIPETITIONER
THROUGH
DATED : Date of signing
ADVOCATES
Advocate's chamber/address
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. MISC. APPLICATION NO. Criminal misc. application number OF 2017
IN
CRL. MISC. MAIN No. Criminal misc. main case number OF 2017
IN THE MATTER OF :-
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Mrs. Deponent's name, aged about Deponent's age years, W/o Deponent's husband's name, R/o Deponent's address, Opposite Landmark near deponent's address, New Delhi, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under :-
1.That I am the Petitioner/Complainant in the above-noted case and, as such, am well conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case and competent to depose hereunder.
2.That the Applicant has gone through the averments made in the accompanying application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., seeking exemption from filing certified copies, and submits that this application has been drafted by my counsel on my instructions and on the facts as briefed by me.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Delhi on this Date of affidavit verification that the facts stated in the above Affidavit are true to my knowledge, no part of the same is false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. MISC. MAIN No. Criminal misc. main case number OF 2017
IN THE MATTER OF :-
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Deponent's name, aged about Deponent's age years, W/o Deponent's husband's name, R/o Deponent's address, New Delhi, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under :-
1.That I am the Petitioner/Complainant in the above-noted case and, as such, am well conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case and competent to depose hereunder.
2.That the contents of the accompanying petition under Section 439(2) read with Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. have been drafted by my counsel as per my instructions, and the contents thereof have been duly read over and explained to me in my vernacular language, and, having fully understood the same, the contents thereof are true and correct to my knowledge.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Delhi on this Date of affidavit verification that the facts stated in the above Affidavit are true to my knowledge, no part of the same is false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. MISC. APPLICATION NO. Criminal misc. application number OF 2017
IN
CRL. MISC. MAIN No. Criminal misc. main case number OF 2017
IN THE MATTER OF :-
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
THE STATE & ORS.: RESPONDENTS
F.I.R. No. FIR number
U/S.: 452/323/34 IPC
P.S.: ------------
APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING CERTIFIED COPIES OF THE ANNEXURES
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:-
1.That the Petitioner has filed annexures along with the main petition in support thereof, and the Description of annexures filed filed are true, correct and compared copies of the originals.
2.That the Petitioner shall apply for obtaining the certified copies of the Annexures for which certified copies to be obtained and undertakes to file the same as soon as they are made available by the copying agency concerned.
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to exempt the Petitioner from filing the certified copies of the Annexures for which exemption sought.
DELHIPETITIONER
THROUGH
DATED:
Date of signing
ADVOCATES
Advocate's chamber/address,
Delhi-110054.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. MISC. MAIN No. Criminal misc. main case number OF 2017.
IN THE MATTER OF:-
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
F.I.R. No. FIR number
U/S.: Sections of FIR
P.S.: Police station
I N D E X
| S.NO. | PARTICULARS | PAGES | C.FEE |
|---|
| 1. | NOTICE OF MOTION | | |
| 5. | PETITION UNDER SECTION 439(2) READ WITH SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. WITH AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT. | | |
| 6. | ANNEXURE P-1: TRUE TYPED COPY OF FIR No.FIR number. | | |
| 7. | ANNEXURE P-2: COPY OF ORDER DATED Date of bail order PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN BAIL APPLICATION NO.Bail application number. | | |
| 8. | APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING CERTIFIED COPIES, WITH AFFIDAVIT. | | |
DELHIPETITIONER
THROUGH
DATED
Date of signing
ADVOCATES
Advocate's chamber/address, Delhi-110054.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. MISC. MAIN No. Criminal misc. main case number OF 2017.
IN THE MATTER OF:-
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
F.I.R. No. FIR number
U/S.: Sections of FIR
P.S.: Police station
URGENT APPLICATION
TO,
THE HON'BLE JOINT REGISTRAR,
HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
NEW DELHI.
SIR,
WOULD YOU KINDLY TREAT THE ACCOMPANYING PETITION AS URGENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE HIGH COURT RULES AND REGULATIONS. THE GROUND OF URGENCY IS AS FOLLOWS:-
To cancel the bail granted to Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 by this Hon'ble Court in Bail Application No.Bail application number vide order dated Date of bail order in FIR No.FIR number, P.S. Police station, under Sections 452/323/34 IPC, in the interest of justice.
DELHIPETITIONER
THROUGH
DATED:
Date of signing
ADVOCATES
Advocate's chamber/address, Delhi-110054.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. MISC. MAIN No. Criminal misc. main case number OF 2017.
IN THE MATTER OF:-
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
F.I.R. No. FIR number
U/S.: 452/323/34 IPC
P.S.: Police station
MEMO OF PARTIES
Petitioner's name
Petitioner's address: PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. Respondent 1's name
2.----------------------
3. Respondent 3's name
Respondents' address: RESPONDENTS
DELHIPETITIONER
THROUGH
DATED
Date of signing
ADVOCATES
Advocate's chamber/address, Delhi-110054.
Petitioner's name Vs. Respondent's name
FIR No. FIR number
P.S.: Police station
U/S.: 452/323/34 IPC
Pending in the Trial court name, Delhi.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. MISC. MAIN No. Criminal misc. main case number OF 2017.
IN THE MATTER OF:-
Petitioner's name
Petitioner's address: PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. Respondent 1's name
2.Respondent 2's name, S/o Respondent 2's father's name
3. Respondent 3's name
Respondents' address: RESPONDENTS
F.I.R. No. FIR number
U/S.: 452/323/34 IPC
P.S.: Police station
PETITION ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER UNDER SECTION 439(2) READ WITH SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE SEEKING CANCELLATION OF THE BAIL GRANTED TO RESPONDENT NOS. 2 AND 3 / ACCUSED PERSONS, NAMELY Respondent 2's first name Respondent 2's surname AND Respondent 3's name, WHO HAVE BEEN GRANTED BAIL BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN BAIL APPLICATION NO.Bail application number VIDE ORDER DATED Date of bail order.
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:-
1.That the present petition has been filed by the Petitioner seeking cancellation of the bail granted to Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 by this Hon'ble Court in Bail Application No.Bail application number in FIR No.FIR number, P.S. Police station, under Sections 452/323/34 IPC, vide order dated Date of bail order.
2.The grounds upon which cancellation of bail is sought, and which require consideration in the present petition, are:-
a.Whether this Hon'ble Court scrutinised the testimony of the witnesses at the stage of hearing of the bail application?
b.Whether the Court, while granting bail to Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 in the present case under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code, ought to have indicated the reasons why bail was being granted?
c.While granting bail to the accused persons, this Hon'ble Court imposed the condition that they would not visit the residential premises of the parents / complainants (the Petitioner herein); the accused persons nevertheless threatened the Petitioner with dire consequences if she did not withdraw the present FIR.
3. That the brief facts leading to the present petition are as follows:-
A.That the Petitioner resides at the address mentioned above; Respondent No. 1 is the son of the Petitioner and Respondent No. 2 is the wife of Respondent No. 1. They have been residing separately from the Petitioner owing to family disputes which are also pending before the Courts below.
B.That on Date of incident at around Time of incident p.m., the Respondents, along with certain other persons, forcibly entered the house of the Petitioner. They used filthy and abusive language against the Petitioner over the telephone before coming to her house, and thereafter beat the Petitioner, snatched her gold chain and ran away while abusing her in filthy language, stating that no one could stop them, that they would come again, and that they had no fear of the police or the law.
C.Thereafter, the Petitioner called the police on number 100, and the police reached the spot, upon which the present FIR was registered against the Respondents. It is submitted that the Petitioner and her husband had debarred Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 from their movable and immovable properties.
D.That the families are not on talking terms, much less visiting each other. The civil dispute relating to the probate of the Will is pending before the Probate court name, Delhi.
E.After the filing of the charge-sheet, the Ld. Trial Court was pleased to frame charges against Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 under Sections 452/323/34 IPC.
F.It is submitted that Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 were granted bail by this Hon'ble Court, after the aforesaid FIR was registered under Sections 452/323/34 of the Indian Penal Code, vide order dated Date of bail order.
4.That this Hon'ble Court, vide order dated Date of bail order, was pleased to grant bail to Respondent Nos. 2 and 3, which order is challenged in the present petition on the following grounds:-
GROUNDS:-
A.That the Petitioner has filed a probate case for the probate of the Will executed by her husband. Respondent No. 2 filed objections to the probate case and has gone to the extent of levelling the wild allegation that the Petitioner murdered her husband.
B.That Respondent No. 2 wrote objectionable remarks on Facebook against the Petitioner and her husband, going to the extent of saying: "MERE MAA BAAP JEET OR MAI UNKA PIND DAN KARTA HU".
C.For that another FIR was lodged by the maid servant of the petitioner, bearing No.Other FIR number under Sections 354/506/427 of the IPC at Police Station Other police station, wherein respondent no. 2 was involved in the molestation of the maid servant.
D.Because the relationship of respondents no. 2 and 3 with the petitioner had been strained since the year Year since which relationship was strained, during the lifetime of Sh. Petitioner's late husband's name, and a number of complaints and FIRs were lodged against respondents no. 2 and 3.
E.For that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 2011 (6) SCC 189, "PrakashKadam Vs. Ram Prasad Vishwanath & Anr.", held that "in considering the question whether to cancel the bail given to an accused, the Court has to consider the gravity and nature of the offence and in case there are very serious allegations against the accused the bail can be cancelled even if the accused had not misused the liberty of bail granted to him".
F.For that respondents no. 2 and 3 are violating the terms of the bail granted by this Hon'ble Court vide order dated Date of earlier bail order dated 09.10.2012.
G.For that respondents no. 2 and 3 threatened the complainant / petitioner with dire consequences if she did not withdraw the present FIR lodged against respondents no. 2 and 3.
H.For that respondents no. 2 and 3 visited the house of the petitioner / complainant and threatened her.
I.For that the Ld. Trial Court ought not to have ignored the testimony of the eye-witnesses, who have given ocular evidence qua the incident.
J.For that expert evidence has two aspects, namely, data evidence and opinion evidence. While it is undoubtedly true that data evidence cannot be rejected where it is inconsistent with oral evidence, so far as opinion evidence is concerned, it is only an inference drawn from the data, and such evidence would not take precedence over direct eye-witness testimony unless, of course, the inconsistency between the two is so great as to obviously falsify the oral evidence; further, the value of medical evidence is only corroborative.
K.For that the Court is not required to scrutinise the testimony of the witnesses at the stage of hearing of a bail application.
L.For that while granting bail in serious offences, the Court ought to indicate reasons as to why bail is being granted, failing which the order would prejudice the complainant.
M.For that the Court failed to consider, while granting bail to the respondents, that they were in a position to influence witnesses in this case and to thwart the course of justice.
N.That the order granting bail to the respondents is totally bad in law, is detrimental to the aforesaid case, and will thwart the course of justice in the aforesaid case.
O.That the order dated Date of bail order granting bail to the respondents was passed without considering the aforesaid material facts and without considering the gravity of the offence, and is totally erroneous and contrary to the law and guidelines settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India as well as the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi.
P.Because the Court failed to appreciate the relevant material and instead considered irrelevant material while granting bail.
Q.That the Ld. Court failed to appreciate, while granting bail to the respondents, that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (Crl.) No.6139/2006, titled "Raj Kumar Maheshwari Vs. Jyoti Gutpa & Anr.", vide its order dated 07.05.2007 cancelling the bail of the accused, observed as under :
"The challenge in this appeal is to the order dated 28.08.2006 passed by the High Court granting bail to the respondent-accused subject to her furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.
The respondent alongwith others is an accused under Section 420 read with 120-B IPC. The amount involved in this case is Rs.1,30,00,000/-. We have gone through the impugned order passed by the High Court and no reason has been assigned in the order as to why the bail should be granted in such a serious nature of offence.
It is settled law that while granting bail in non-bailable offence the primary consideration is the gravity and the nature of the offence. It appears that the High Court has not at all considered the gravity and the nature of the offence while granting bail to the respondent-accused:"
5.In view of the aforesaid facts and law, the Court, while granting bail to the respondents vide order dated Date of bail order, neither considered the undisputed facts available on record, nor the gravity of the offence, nor the conduct of the accused; as such, the impugned order, being bad in law, is liable to be set aside.
6.That no similar petition for cancellation of bail has been filed by the petitioner / complainant before this Hon'ble Court, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, or any other Court.
P R A Y E R
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to:
a.Set aside the order dated Date of bail order passed by this Hon'ble Court in Bail Application No.Bail application number in FIR No.FIR number, P.S. Police station, Delhi, under Sections 452/323/34 of the IPC.
b.Cancel the bail granted to respondents no. 2 and 3 by this Hon'ble Court vide order dated Date of earlier bail order dated 09.10.2012, and direct that they be taken into custody in the aforesaid case, in the interest of justice.
c.Pass such further order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper, in the interest of justice.
DELHIPETITIONER
THROUGH
DATED: Date of signing
ADVOCATES
Advocate's chamber/address.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. MISC. APPLICATION NO. Criminal misc. application number OF 2017
IN
CRL. MISC. MAIN No. Criminal misc. main case number OF 2017
IN THE MATTER OF :-
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Mrs. Deponent's name, aged about Deponent's age years, W/o Deponent's husband's name, R/o Deponent's address, Opposite Landmark near deponent's address, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under :-
1.That I am the Petitioner / Complainant in the above-noted case, and as such, in that capacity, I am well conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case and competent to depose hereunder.
2.That the deponent has gone through the averments made in the accompanying application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., whereby exemption from filing certified copies has been sought, and submits that this application has been drafted by my counsel on my instructions and on the facts as briefed by me.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Delhi on this Date of affidavit verification day of September, 2017, that the facts stated in the above affidavit are true to my knowledge, no part of the same is false, and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. MISC. MAIN No. Criminal misc. main case number OF 2017
IN THE MATTER OF :-
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Deponent's name, aged about Deponent's age years, W/o Deponent's husband's name, R/o Deponent's address, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under :-
1.That I am the Petitioner / Complainant in the above-noted case, and as such, in that capacity, I am well conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case and competent to depose hereunder.
2.That the contents of the accompanying petition under Section 439(2) r/w Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. have been drafted by my counsel as per my instructions, and the contents thereof have been duly read over and explained to me in my vernacular language, and after fully understanding the contents thereof, I state that the same are true and correct to my knowledge.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Delhi on this Date of affidavit verification day of September, 2017, that the facts stated in the above affidavit are true to my knowledge, no part of the same is false, and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
DEPONENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. MISC. APPLICATION NO. Criminal misc. application number OF 2017
IN
CRL. MISC. MAIN No. Criminal misc. main case number OF 2017
IN THE MATTER OF:
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
THE STATE & ORS.: RESPONDENTS
F.I.R. No. FIR number
U/S.: 452/323/34 IPC
P.S.: ------------
APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING CERTIFIED COPIES OF THE ANNEXURES
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
1.That the Petitioner has filed annexures along with the main petition in support of the petition, and the Description of annexures filed filed therewith are true, correct and compared copies of the originals.
2.That the Petitioner shall apply for obtaining the certified copies of the Annexures for which certified copies to be obtained and undertakes to file the same as soon as they are made available by the concerned copying agency.
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to exempt the Petitioner from filing the certified copies of the Annexures for which exemption sought.
DELHIPETITIONER
THROUGH
DATED:
Date of signing
ADVOCATE
Advocate's chamber/address,
Delhi.