STATE Vs. MOHD. NAVED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant/State has preferred the present application under Ss. 439(2) read with 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ("Cr.P.C.") seeking cancellation of bail granted to accused/respondent Mohd. Naved@Pilla in case FIR No. 964/2015, registered at Police Station Sarai Rohilla, under Ss. 302/34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 ("IPC").

(2.) The respondent was granted regular bail in the aforesaid case vide order dtd. 10/10/2018 by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi in SC No.28312/2016 titled as "State vs. Mohd. Naved @ Peela".

(3.) The case of applicant is that the respondent Mohd. Naved @ Pilla misused the liberty granted by the Court and started getting involved in serious criminal activities and have flouted the conditions of bail. It is submitted by learned APP for State that while the respondent was out on bail, an FIR No. 211/2020, PS Sarai Rohilla, under Ss. 394/427/506/34 of IPC was registered on 11/6/2020 against the respondent and his family members for robbing the shop of a person namely Akhlakh, who stated that one Mohd. Sadkeen used to took eatables from his shop without paying the same and when he raised his voice against it, Mohd. Sadkeen started beating him and he was joined by his family members including the respondent herein, and all of them then destroyed his shop. Further, when complainant went to the police station to register his complaint regarding the said incident, the accused persons pelted the stones at the police officials also. Learned APP for State submits that on the same day, another FIR No. 210/2020, PS Sarai Rohilla, under Ss. 186/353/307/34 of IPC and Ss. 27 and 54 of the Arms Act, 1959 was also registered against the respondent on the complaint of SI Pankaj Thakaran who was posted as I/C PP Inderlok, wherein he stated that while he was addressing the dispute among the parties, the respondent started verbally abusing the police officers and he was even carrying a gun while he entered the premises and had fired shots. He also stated that respondent along with the other accused persons attacked the staff posted at PP Inderlok in which he sustained injuries.