PRAHLAD MAHTO Vs. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present is a bail application under Sec. 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking pre -arrest bail in FIR No. 312/2014 under Ss. 308/34 IPC registered at Police Station -Kamla Market, Delhi. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant has made a compelling case of the applicant having been falsely implicated by the witness in the subject FIR namely Devanand S/o. Kunj Bihari. Learned counsel would further urge that the subject FIR was registered on 20th October, 2014 and the said Devanand S/o. Kunj Bihari, who claims to be an eye witness in the commission of the offence resulting into the subject FIR, is stated to have informed the Police of the applicant's role in the alleged commission of offence only on 20th February, 2015. Learned counsel would also urge that the eye witness Devanand S/o. Kunj Bihari has done so with a view to coerce the applicant to withdraw FIR No. 311/2014 under Ss. 308/34 IPC registered at Police Station -Kamla Market, Delhi, on a complaint made by the latter against the former on the 20th October, 2014.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant would lastly urge that the brother of the applicant namely Vakil Mahto has already been enlarged on regular bail by the Sessions Judge on 8th October, 2015. In other words, he claims parity in the matter.

(3.) On the other hand, Ms. Radhika Kolluru, learned APP appearing on behalf of the official respondent would urge that a non -bailable warrant was issued against the applicant on 24th July, 2015 and that he has been absconding in order to avoid his arrest.