Tis Hazari firing: Court grants bail to accused

A court here on Friday granted regular bail to an accused arrested in connection with the alleged firing incident in the Tis Hazari district court premises during a fight between lawyers.

The court granted bail after noting that custodial interrogation of the accused was not required and 12 other co-accused in the case were already provided the relief.

A gunshot was allegedly fired in the Tis Hazari court premises on July 5 last year during a fight between two groups of lawyers, following which police arrested 13 people, including some non-lawyers.

Play button

Assistant Sessions Judge Rakesh Kumar was hearing the regular bail plea of accused Sandeep Sharma.

READ ALSO  तीस हजारी फायरिंग: अदालत ने मेडिकल आधार पर आरोपियों को 20 दिसंबर तक अंतरिम जमानत दी

The plea filed by the accused’s counsel, Advocate Sanjay Sharma said no recovery was made from his client and that Sandeep was suffering from some medical ailments.

Also Read

READ ALSO  Court denies pre-arrest bail to woman lawyer accused of abetting suicide of ex Sena (UBT) corporator

The court noted that nine accused in the case were granted regular bail, while three others had secured anticipatory bail.

“Keeping in view the fact that other co-accused persons have already granted bail, as such no further custodial interrogation is required, applicant Sandeep Sharma is admitted to regular bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs 30,000 with one surety in the like amount,” it said.

The court rejected the prosecution’s argument against bail on the ground that Sandeep was involved in seven other cases, including a matter where he had threatened a witness, saying the details of these cases were not provided.

READ ALSO  Rajasthan High Court Orders Local Authorities to Prevent Child Marriages or Face Responsibility

It said that Sandeep was also provided interim bail with certain conditions and the accused had complied with the terms.

The other conditions of bail included the accused joining the investigation when required, not tampering with evidence, not contacting the complainant or other witnesses and informing the court in case of a change in his address.

Related Articles

Latest Articles