A Delhi court has granted bail to a man accused in an assault case while pulling up the police officials for the lapse in the procedure of arrest. The court noted that the accused was arrested for allegedly assaulting a man but the Investigating Officer (IO) of Subhash Place police station in northwest Delhi had failed to record the reasons for the arrest.
It directed the Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP) concerned to take appropriate action against the IO and other responsible officials in the case. Having considered the mandate of law and the directions of the Supreme Court while applying to the facts and circumstances of the present case where the Investigating Officer (IO) or Station House Officer (SHO) concerned did not comply with the mandate of the Supreme Court and did not give reasons of the arrest of the applicant or accused, this court is inclined to grant regular bail to accused on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs 25,000 with one surety of like amount, Additional Sessions Judge Mohd. Farrukh said.
In an order passed on August 8, the court directed the accused Hemant Vohra to attend the trial regularly and not to contact, influence, or intimidate the complainant, or tamper with evidence. The judge further said, the derelictions of duty on the part of IO and SHO concerned is being brought to the knowledge of Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP) concerned who shall take appropriate action against them.
The court noted that as per the arrest memo, no reason, much less a plausible reason, was given by the IO for arresting the accused. There was no other material placed on record for showing the reason for arrest and the IO had informed the court that the accused was arrested after consultation with the SHO concerned, the judge said.
As per the relevant judgements of the Supreme Court and circulars of Delhi Police, it was incumbent upon the IO to record the reasons for arresting the accused, the judge said. The conduct of the IO concerned and SHO of Subhash Place police station was in clear violation of the directions in the circular and the mandates of the Supreme Court, the court said.
According to the prosecution, the accused along with his associates assaulted the victim on July 2, 2022, following which an FIR was registered under Sections 308 (attempt to commit culpable homicide) and 34 (common intention) of the IPC. Counsel for the accused said that he was falsely implicated in the case and was in judicial custody since July 6.
The counsel sought bail on the ground that the accused was the sole breadwinner of his family, having a one-and-a-half-year minor son.
Read the Latest News and Breaking News here
Comments
0 comment