MOHD MOIN @ MUNNA Vs. STATE ( NCT OF DELHI)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the order dated 19.11.2015, passed by the learned Special Judge 03, Karkardooma, Delhi, vide which the bail application filed by the present petitioner has been rejected, the petitioner has preferred the present bail application under Section 439 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for seeking bail in a case registered under FIR No.0658/2015 under Section 387 of Indian Penal Code, Police Station Gandhi Nagar, New Delhi.

(2.) The prosecution case is based on the complaint of one Jai Kumar Jain, who runs the business of pant and shirt from Shop No.6745/6719, Janta Gali, Gandhi Nagar, Delhi 110031 in the name and style of J.K. Jain Hosiery and Trading House Brand (Sparky), and stated in his statement that on 13.10.2015, one rickshaw puller Yameen, who used to bring and take material from his shop for the last 6-7 months came to his show and gave one envelope, wherein it was written that he has to pay Rs.5 crore and in case of refusal, his children Timmy and Anju and their son will be killed. It is further stated in complaint that he will also be killed in case this information is given to any other person or to the police. In the said letter, the reference of house, shop and farm house of the complainant were also mentioned. The complainant was asked to send Rs.5 crore in the same rickshaw after putting the money in a cartoon and not to follow the rickshaw. Thereafter, the complainant came to the police station alongwith the said letter and the case was registered.

(3.) Mr. Urooj A. Khan, counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner is named in the present case at the instance of co-accused Niyazul with malafide intention and ulterior motive to send the petitioner behind the bar and ruin the image of the petitioner in front of the complainant, as the petitioner has long standing business relations for the last 10-15 years with the complainant. It is also contended on behalf of the petitioner that during the course of investigation, the rickshaw puller Yameen had refused to identify the petitioner and specifically told the police that the sender was some other person and not the person brought before him, i.e., the petitioner. One Niyazul who also works for the complainant, was missing and he belongs to the same village as that of the petitioner.