$~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 4697/2024 ZEESHAN .....Petitioner Through: Mr M L Yadav And Mr Prashant, Advocates. versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through: Mr. Manoj Pant, APP for the State. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA O R D E R % 24.01.2025 1. The present bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereafter ‘BNSS’) has been filed on behalf of the applicant seeking regular bail in case F.I.R bearing no. 142/2018, registered at Police Station Jahangir Puri, North-West District, Delhi for offences punishable under Sections 365/395/120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereafter ‘IPC’). 2. Briefly stated, the present case came to be registered on the basis of a complaint made on 07.04.2024 by the complainant Himanshu stating therein that he is a driver by profession and was employed to drive Tata Ace Carrier vehicle bearing no. DL1LAE6955. On 03.04.2024, while he had loaded copper wires from Jhilmil Industrial Area and had left for Bawana Industrial Area to deliver copper wires weighing about 1900kgs and had reached on outer Ring Road, three persons riding a red scooty had stopped This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/01/2025 at 11:54:27 him, on the pretext that his vehicle had hit the scooty. Two of them had pulled him out of his vehicle and had taken him in their WagonR after blindfolding him. Thereafter, driving for about 1½ hours, they had dropped him at a place in Sonipat, Haryana. He had further informed the police that the other persons who were riding the scooty had taken his vehicle alongwith copper wires and also his mobile phone and Rs. 2000/-. The present FIR came to be registered on the basis of his complaint. During the investigation, the accused persons were arrested. The applicant herein was arrested in this case on 12.04.2024. 3. It is contended by the learned APP for the State that the role of the present applicant is that as per the disclosure statement, the vehicle WagonR which was used for the commission of offence in question, was registered in the name of father of the applicant. It is further stated that the applicant is an accomplice in the present case and was driving the vehicle in question. It is also argued that the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature and the same are supported by CCTV footage. The victim is yet to be examined in the present case and therefore, it is prayed the application be rejected. 4. The learned counsel for the applicant, on the other hand, argues that the accused herein is in fact a victim since in his disclosure itself, he had admitted that he was driving the vehicle, however, he was under threat and the co-accused persons had misguided him and had asked him to bring the vehicle in question on a false pretext. The learned counsel further states that instead of making him a witness and a victim himself, he has been made an accused in this case, and therefore, he be granted regular bail. 5. This Court has heard arguments addressed on behalf of both the This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/01/2025 at 11:54:27 parties and has perused the material available on record including the disclosure statement of the applicant. 6. This Court notes that the disclosure statement itself mentions that the applicant had admitted that he was driving the vehicle in question that belongs to his father, however he had brought the vehicle on the asking of the co-accused persons on the pretext of going to Delhi, and not for the purpose of committing any offence. Further, the applicant had also mentioned in the disclosure statement itself that he was threatened by the co- accused persons to keep on driving in a certain direction without trying to be smart. 7. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, and considering the fact that the applicant has remained in judicial custody for more than nine months, this Court is inclined to grant regular bail to the applicant on furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety of the like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court/Successor Court/Link Court/Duty Judge concerned on the following terms and conditions: i) The applicant shall remain available on mobile numbers, shared by him with the Police. ii) The applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the concerned Court. iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make an attempt to influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence in any manner. 8. Accordingly, the present bail application stands disposed of. 9. Nothing expressed hereinabove shall tantamount to expression of This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/01/2025 at 11:54:27 opinion on merits of the case. 10. The order be uploaded on the website forthwith. SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J JANUARY 24, 2025/KG Click here to check corrigendum, if any This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/01/2025 at 11:54:27