HARI CHAND Vs. STATEAND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant petition under Sec. 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter "Cr.P.C.") has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for cancellation of anticipatory bail which was granted to the Respondent No. 2/Accused (hereinafter "Respondent No. 2") by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Special Electricity Court, Dwarka vide its order dtd. 20/1/2022, passed in Bail Application No. 129/2022 titled "State v. Virender Kumar Syal", in FIR No. 617/2021, for offences punishable under Ss. 323/341/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered at Police Station Dwarka South.

(2.) Mr. Ramesh Gupta, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Jaspreet Singh Kapur, Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that learned Additional Sessions Judge failed to appreciate that the petitioner is a handicapped person with 60 per cent disability in his leg due to polio, and the said fact was well within the knowledge of the Respondent No. 2. It is submitted that the Respondent No. 2 had beaten the petitioner with danda (wooden stick) which caused multiple fractures on his legs and hand.

(3.) Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the Respondent No. 2 has committed a grave offence under the provisions of The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 and he has referred to Sec. 92 of the said Act and submitted that according to the said provision, the offence committed by the Respondent No. 2 is punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend upto 5 years.