BABBAN GIRI Vs. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this petition under Sec. 439(2) read with Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ('Cr.P.C.') seeking cancellation of bail granted to the accused persons namely, respondent no. 2 i.e. Garvesh vide order dtd. 16/9/2020, respondent no. 3 i.e. Sunil Gupta vide order dtd. 4/8/2020, respondent no. 4 i.e. Praful Kumar vide order dtd. 5/10/2020, respondent no. 5 i.e. Abhishek Kumar, respondent no. 6 i.e. Sandeep Kumar Samal, respondent no. 7 i.e. Sunil Gupta vide orders 14/10/2020, and respondent no. 8 i.e. Dilip Kumar vide order dtd. 29/10/2020, in FIR No. 400/2018, registered at Police Station Najafgarh, Delhi for offences punishable under Ss. 364/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('IPC') on the ground that the accused persons are threatening and abusing the complainant and her relatives.

(2.) The FIR in this case was registered on 7/12/2018, on the complaint made by the wife of present petitioner, whereby it was alleged that her three daughters had been kidnapped on 4/12/2018 by the accused persons.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the accused persons are violating the conditions imposed upon them by the learned Trial Court while granting them regular bail. It is argued that the petitioner and his family is victim of circumstances and the crimes committed by the respondents herein, who are victimizing the petitioner and his daughters. It is stated that on 14/6/2020, the accused persons had attempted to burn the petitioner's house by pouring petrol on the main gate. It is also submitted that another FIR No. 705/2020 was registered on 10/7/2020,on the complaint lodged by petitioner's wife, on allegations that her two daughters had gone missing and that there have been several instances on which the accused persons have threatened the complainant with dire consequences. It is also pointed out that one more FIR was registered on 5/2/2021 on the complaint of petitioner's wife as her minor daughter had gone missing. It is also argued that present petitioner was falsely implicated in one case under Ss. 323/354/376D/506/34 of IPC, by wife of one of the accused. It is submitted that the accused persons are misusing the liberty granted to them by the learned Trial Court and that they are a threat to the complainant and her family. Therefore, it is prayed that the bail granted to the accused persons be cancelled.