Supreme Court dismisses Bharti’s bail plea after wife says no to mediation [Read Order]

Somnath Bharti

Somnath Bharti

Supreme Court of India has dismissed former Delhi Law Minister and present Delhi MLA Somnath Bharti’s special leave petition to Appeal against Delhi High Court’s rejection of his application for anticipatory bail.

Court had earlier issued a notice to Bharti’s wife – Lipika Mitra asking if she was agreeable to enter into mediation proceedings over her domestic dispute with Bharti. However Mitra responded in a ‘No’. In view of her reply in negative, Court observed that it “cannot force her to go before the learned Mediator for amicable settlement of the disputes between the parties”

As Bharti had already surrendered in compliance of Court’s earlier order, Court observed that there was noting remaining in the matter and hence dismissed Bhart’s plea holding it to be infructuous.

Court observed that the recourse now available to Bharti was to move to the trial court to seek a regular bail as per the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Court also directed that if such an application is filed, the trial judge may decide the application on the same day or the next day.

Court however made it clear that it was not giving any opinion on the merits of such a bail application and that the trial Judge will not be influenced by any of the observations made by the High Court while considering the request for grant of anticipatory bail.

Read the bail order:


 

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Special Leave Petition to Appeal (Crl ) No. 8183 of 2015
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 22/09/2015 in BA No. 1952/2015 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi)

Somnath Bharti [Petitioner]

versus

State (Government of NCT Delhi) [Respondent]

Date: 5 October 2015

This petition was called on for hearing today.

Coram:

  • Hon’ble The Chief Justice of India HL Dattu
  • Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitava Roy

Counsel:

For Petitioner:

Ms. Pareena Swarup, Adv., Mr. Vijay Aggarwal, Adv., Mr. Mudit Jain, Adv., Ms. Samprikta Ghosal, Adv., Mr. Arjun Taneja, Adv., Mr. Ashul Agarwal, Adv., Mr. Lokendra Kumar, Adv., Md. Shahid Anwar,Adv.

For Respondent:

Mr.Ranjit Kumar, S.G., Mr. Tushar Mehta, ASG, Ms. V. Mohana, Sr. Adv., Mr. R. Balasubramanian, Adv., Mr. Santosh Kumar, Adv., Mr. K.L. Janjani, Adv., Mr. D.S. Mahra, Adv., Mr. Shalendra Babbar, Spl. Public Prosecutor


ORDER

This Special Leave Petition is directed against an order passed by the High Court of Delhi in Bail Application No.1952 of 2015, dated 22.09.2015. By the impugned order, the High Court declined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

On the first date of hearing, on instructions, Shri Gopal Subramaniam, learned senior counsel had made a statement that his client would surrender before the jurisdictional police authorities. Placing on record the statement so made by the learned senior counsel, we did not pass any further orders in the matter.

On the subsequent date of hearing, a letter was produced before us by the learned senior counsel stating that there is every possibility that the disputes between the parties can be settled, if the matter is referred to the learned Mediator of the Mediation Centre of the Supreme Court.

Taking into consideration the aforementioned letter, we had directed the Registry to issue notice of the Special Leave Petition on Smt. Lipika Mitra. We had further directed Smt. Lipika Mitra to be present before us today i.e. 05.10.2015 at 10:30 a.m.

Before we took the matter for further hearing we asked Smt. Lipika Mitra whether she is agreeable to go before the learned Mediator. Her answer to us was a positive ‘No’. In view of that we cannot force her to go before the learned Mediator for amicable settlement of the disputes between the parties.

Since the petitioner has already surrendered before the jurisdictional police authorities, in our opinion, nothing survives in this petition for our consideration and decision. Therefore, we dispose of this Special Leave Petition as having become infructuous.

It is now for the petitioner to move the learned Trial Judge for grant of regular bail, as envisaged under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, “the Code”).

If such an application is filed, we direct the learned Trial Judge to consider the said application/petition, if possible, on the same day or at least on the next day, in accordance with the provisions of the Code.

We clarify that we have not expressed any opinion on the application/petition that may be filed by the petitioner for grant of regular bail.

While considering the bail application, the learned Trial Judge will not be influenced by any of the observations made by the High Court in the impugned order while considering the request for grant of anticipatory bail.

Ordered accordingly.


[ Charanjeet Kaur ] [ Vinod Kulvi ]

A.R.-cum-P.S.       Asstt. Registrar

[Copy of this order be given dasti.]

Image from here

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *