|
The Delhi High Court recently dismissed the bail plea of a person who allegedly abducted and robbed a man of Rs 65 Lakh along with his co-accused impersonating as police personnel from Uttar Pradesh.
A case was registered at Lahori Gate police station in April 2022. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma dismissed the bail plea of Rahul Kumar Pal considering the seriousness of the offence and the nature of the charges. The bench said that this is not a fit case for a grant of bail, at this stage. The High Court noted, " The applicant and his associates are visible in CCTV footage at the spot. Call Detail Record (CDR), prima facie, discloses his presence at the place of the incident." Moreover, the applicant did not join Test Identification Parade (TIP) on the ground that the complainant knows him. The complainant has identified the applicant in the CCTV footage, and the bench further noted in the order of October 20 this year 2022. The bench also noted that the applicant is involved in two cases of similar nature registered at Agra's Hari Parbat police station of Uttar Pradesh. The brief facts are that the applicant along with his four associates impersonated himself as a police official of Uttar Pradesh Police and abducted the complainant in a white Scorpio and thereafter, robbed an amount of Rs. 65,00,000 along with other articles. The complainant Rahul Ravinder Pandey had lodged a complaint on March 31, 2022, after which an e-FIR was registered at Lahori Gate Police Station on April 4 this year. The petitioner was arrested on April 4 and a charge sheet was filed under sections 365, 395, 342 and 170 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the petitioner was arrested, he is in Judicial Custody. It is submitted that the petitioner was arrested in this case only on the basis that the Scorpio car which was allegedly involved in this case was recovered from the applicant. It was also submitted that the complainant had filed a complaint after five days of the alleged offence and the statements of the complainant on April 4 and 7, 2022 are contrary to each other and the whole story of the complainant is concocted. On the other hand, Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) for the State submitted that a charge sheet has been filed in the present case and an offence punishable under Section 365, 395, 342 and 170 IPC is made out against the accused. (ANI)
|
