TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (8) TMI 1554
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on seeking cancellation of bail. At the outset, it may be noted that though the petitioner seeks cancellation of bail of Pooja and Jyoti, however they have not been impleaded as parties in the present petition. 2. The order dated 9th June, 2016 reads as under:- "These are two separate applications under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail moved on behalf of applicants/accused persons. Both these applications are being disposed off together vide this common order, as they arise out of same FIR. Arguments on both the bail applications heard. Replies perused. Before dealing with the rival submissions made on behalf of both the sides, it may be noted that similar bail applications of the applicants were dismissed by this Court on 17.05.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... registered in various police stations and she being lady Advocate, is taking advantage of said fact by getting false cases registered against the applicants and their family members. Ld. Counsel further argued that the complainant gave beatings to the husband of applicant in Rohini Court Complex on 28.04.2016, due to which he sustained grievous injuries on his head and FIR no. 441/16 has also been registered at PS Prashant Vihar against the complainant in this regard. He further argued that the applicants are no more required for any custodial interrogation. Ld. Counsel of applicants had also argued that there is further detention of 22 days of applicants in this case has passed after dismissal of their previous bail applications on merits....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nant also argued that false FIR No. 441/16, U/s 323/341/506/34 IPC has been got registered by husband of applicant Pooja Sharma at PS Prashant Vihar on 28.04.2016. Ld. Counsel of complainant further submitted that there is still reasonable apprehension of intimidation to the complainant and tampering of the evidence and in case the applicants are released on bail, it will be quite difficult for complainant to depose freely during the course of trial. He also placed on record copy of MLCs of complainant prepared at BSA Hospital on 08.04.2016 and 27.04.2016 with regard to subsequent incidents which allegedly took place on said dates for which FIR nos. 392/16 and 437/16 were registered at PS Prashant Vihar. Counsel of complainant further argue....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....offences under Section 308/452 IPC are bailable in nature. So far as, offence under Section 308 IPC is concerned, it is informed to the Court that complainant was discharged from the hospital on the same day. Trial may take considerable time and thus, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicants behind the bars. Keeping in view the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, the discussion made herein above and the period of incarceration of the applicants behind the jail, the applicants/accused namely Jyoti and Pooja are ordered to be released on bail, subject to their furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Ld MM/Link MM/Ld Duty MM and subj....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Jyoti and Bail Application No. 646/2016 of Pooja seeking anticipatory bail were dismissed by this Court, however the Court in the concluding paragraph noted- "In normal circumstances the petitioners being ladies would have been entitled to a discretionary relief in their favour, however, the facts of the present case are peculiar, as the parties are resident of same/nearby locality and the quarrel took place over the parking of the vehicle. The situation is peculiar because it is not the solitary incident as prior thereto also in the year 2013 a quarrel had taken place in this regard and the matter was compromised between the parties but then again the complainant was attacked by the applicants and their family members on 27.11.2015. When ....