Claims For Recovery Of Gold Ornaments In Matrimonial Disputes Must Be Supported By Probable Evidence; Exaggerated Claims Unsafe: Kerala High Court Naib Tahsildar Performing Quasi-Judicial Duties Is A 'Judge', Protected From Disciplinary Action For Bonafide Errors: Madhya Pradesh High Court Purchaser Estopped From Refusing Delivery Or Payment Of Statutory Taxes After Participating In Machinery Trial Runs: Madras High Court Presumption Of Marriage From Aadhaar, Passports Is Rebuttable; Long Silence Dislodges Marital Claim: Kerala High Court Government Cannot Deny Promotional Benefits To Employee Who Assumes Charge On The Date Of Superannuation: Karnataka High Court Disproportionate Assets 608% More Than Salary Establish 'Proceeds Of Crime' Prima Facie; No Mini-Trial At Discharge Stage: Jharkhand High Court Decree Based On 'Evasive Denial' Improper If Defendant Raises Specific Defenses Going To Root Of Case: J&K & Ladakh High Court Trial Courts Cannot Adjourn Ad-Interim Injunction Petitions For Months While Ordering 'Urgent Notice': Andhra Pradesh High Court Agent Of Court Receiver Who Breaches Undertaking On Nature Of Business Not Entitled To Occupy Premises Without Paying Royalty: Bombay High Court Criminal Antecedents Of A Witness Do Not Operate As Disqualification, Testimony To Be Assessed With Caution Not Suspicion: Calcutta High Court Bar On Raising Benami Defense Under Section 4 Applies To All Suits Filed After 1988 Act, Even For Past Transactions: Allahabad High Court Article 21 Can Trump UAPA Bail Restrictions In Cases Of Prolonged Incarceration: Delhi High Court Grants Bail To Activist Khuram Parvez Mere Possession Of Jihad Literature Not An Offence; Cannot Be Tagged With Terrorism Without Evidence Of Criminal Act: Telangana High Court

Delhi High Court Grants Bail to Accused in Assault and Property Occupation Case: “Length of Custody and Witness Examination Crucial”

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling today, the Delhi High Court granted regular bail to Ram Prasad, who had been in judicial custody since December 18, 2019. The case, registered under various sections of the IPC and Section 10 of the POCSO Act, involved allegations of illegal property occupation and physical assault.

Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar, while delivering the order, emphasized the importance of considering the duration of custody and the status of witness examination in bail decisions. “The length of the custody and the fact that the material public witnesses have been examined are key considerations in this case,” stated Justice Bhatnagar.

The FIR, lodged at Khyala Police Station, detailed serious accusations against the petitioner, including assaulting and outraging the modesty of the complainant, and cutting the hair of her young son. Despite these grave charges, the court observed that since the material public witnesses had been examined and there was no risk of evidence tampering, bail was warranted.

The petitioner's counsel had argued for his release, highlighting that all material witnesses had been examined and no further purpose would be served by keeping him in custody. Conversely, the State, assisted by the complainant’s counsel, opposed the bail, underscoring the serious nature of the allegations.

In his judgment, Justice Bhatnagar remarked, “Considering the length of custody since 18.12.2019 and the examination of material witnesses, the court finds grounds for bail.” The court stipulated that the petitioner is to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 and a surety of the like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

Date of Decision: 01.12.2023

RAM PRASAD VS STATE NCT OF DELHI

Latest Legal News