Supreme Court Dismisses the Plea to Cancel Bail of AAP MLA Prakash Jarwal

Must Read

“Anganwadi Centers to Be Reopened Outside the Containment Zones, Which Is to Be Decided by the State”: Supreme Court

This case concerns the reopening of the Anganwadi Centers after they had been closed due to the lockdown being...

“Credit Facilities Being Granted by the Primary Agricultural Credit Society to the Non-Members Is No Longer Illegal”: Supreme Court

This Case concerns the dispute relating to the grant of tax exemption under Section 80P of the Income Tax...

Back Wages of Labourers is a Question of Facts Depending Upon Various Factors: Gujarat High Court

The petition has been filed by workmen and employer against an award dated 23.04.2009 passed by the Labour Court,...

WhatsApp Messages Would Have No Evidentiary Value Until They Are Certified According to Section 65b of the Indian Evidence Act: Punjab & Haryana High...

Brief facts of the case Paramjit Kaur, the proprietor of Brioshine Pharma, a licensed chemist, booked two consignments. The first...

Delhi High Court Seeks Response From Centre, RBI in PIL to Regulate Online Lending Platforms

A notice had been issued by the Delhi HC in a PIL that sought regulation of online lending platforms...

“Consensual Affair” Cannot Be Defence Against the Charge of Kidnapping of the Minor, Sentence Reduced in View of Age Difference: Supreme Court

This Case concerns the appeal against the conviction under the charges of kidnapping and discussed whether the punishment was...

Follow us

The Supreme Court received a Petition. The Petition sought cancellation of the bail granted to the MLA of AAP Prakash Jarwa.

Facts of the Case

On 24th June 2020, High Court of Delhi granted bail to AAP MLA Prakash Jarwal. He is under the direction to not contact or influence any witnesses of the prosecution. The granting of Bail was on a personal bond of Rs. 25,000.

On 18th April 2020, 52-year-old doctor Rajendra Singh committed suicide by hanging himself in his house. Allegation against MLA Prakash Jarwal is of abetting suicide of late Dr Rajendra Singh. He held the MLA responsible for his death in his suicide note.

The Police Complaint states that late Dr Rajendra had supplied water tankers to the Delhi Jal Board
. The Accused demanded money from the deceased for damages caused. Due to the non-fulfilment of damages, the Accused did not clear the victim’s payment.

Court’s Observation 

A 3 Judge Bench heard the matter. It comprised of Justice R. Banumathi, Justice Ajay Rastogi and Justice Aniruddha. The Bench observed that- 
“There were no allegations against Petitioner in the ‘Suicide Note’ and ‘Diary’ recovered by the police. This, it seems, there is no proximity and link in the alleged commission of offence. Moreover, regarding allegations of extortion of money for Delhi Assembly Election held in February 2020 from all tanker owners were not complained by family members of deceased or any other tanker owner, however, made only in ‘Dairy’ and ‘Suicide Note’, some of which are without signature and in different handwriting.”
The Hon’ble Court also observed that dealing between the victim and accused is taking place since 2006. In the past, there were no complaints made against accused of extortion or harassment.
Therefore, the Court further observed that-  Regarding allegations of stoppage of payments of deceased and his family, in reply to RTI application made on 27-04-2020, it is categorically stated by DJB that their payments never stopped and around Rs.62 lakhs paid to them from January 2019 to January 2020.”

Court’s Decision 

The Hon’ble Court disposed of the plea. Further, the family could go to the appropriate Court for cancellation of Bail.
The Bench lastly stated that — “It is made clear that during the trial, the trial Judge-Learned Sessions Judge may not be influenced by any of the views made in the impugned order by the High Court.”

Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News,InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

“Anganwadi Centers to Be Reopened Outside the Containment Zones, Which Is to Be Decided by the State”: Supreme Court

This case concerns the reopening of the Anganwadi Centers after they had been closed due to the lockdown being imposed.  Brief facts of the case This...

“Credit Facilities Being Granted by the Primary Agricultural Credit Society to the Non-Members Is No Longer Illegal”: Supreme Court

This Case concerns the dispute relating to the grant of tax exemption under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961.  Brief facts of the...

Back Wages of Labourers is a Question of Facts Depending Upon Various Factors: Gujarat High Court

The petition has been filed by workmen and employer against an award dated 23.04.2009 passed by the Labour Court, Bhuj in the case of...

WhatsApp Messages Would Have No Evidentiary Value Until They Are Certified According to Section 65b of the Indian Evidence Act: Punjab & Haryana High...

Brief facts of the case Paramjit Kaur, the proprietor of Brioshine Pharma, a licensed chemist, booked two consignments. The first consignment, on 10.06.2020 and the,...

Delhi High Court Seeks Response From Centre, RBI in PIL to Regulate Online Lending Platforms

A notice had been issued by the Delhi HC in a PIL that sought regulation of online lending platforms (Dharanidhar Karimojji vs UOI). Brief Facts: The...

“Consensual Affair” Cannot Be Defence Against the Charge of Kidnapping of the Minor, Sentence Reduced in View of Age Difference: Supreme Court

This Case concerns the appeal against the conviction under the charges of kidnapping and discussed whether the punishment was to be enhanced or not.   Brief...

Delhi HC to Municipal Corp: Paucity of Funds Not an Excuse for Non-Payment of Salaries and Pensions

The Delhi High Court ruled that the paucity of funds cannot be an excuse and pulled up municipal corporations for not paying salaries and pensions to their employees as the right to receive payment is a fundamental right guaranteed in our constitution.

US Supreme Court Reinstates Restriction on Abortion Pills

The Supreme Court of the United States granted the Trump administration’s request to reinstate federal rules requiring women to make in-person visits to hospitals...

Supreme Court Upheld “Environmental Rule of Law” in NGT Decision to Demolish Illegal Hotel on Forest Land

This case concerns the dispute relating to the additional construction of hotel-cum-restaurant structure in the Bus Stand Complex along with a bus stand and...

UK Supreme Court Rules in Favour of Policyholders in the COVID-19 Business Interruption Case

The United Kingdom’s Supreme Court finally concluded the long-awaited COVID-19 business interruption case brought by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and the Hiscox Action...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -