LOVEE NARULA vs DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT, GOVT OF INDIA, THROUGH ITS ASISTANT DIRECTOR DELHI ZONAL OFFICE-II
$~50
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: 28.03.2025
+ BAIL APPLN. 1159/2025
LOVEE NARULA
…..Petitioner
Through: Mr. Siddharth Agarwal, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Garima Singh, Mr. Prince Kumar and Mr. D. D. Verma, Advs.
versus
DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT, GOVT OF INDIA, THROUGH ITS ASISTANT DIRECTOR DELHI ZONAL OFFICE-II
…..Respondent
Through: Mr. Arkaj Kumar, Standing Counsel, Mr. Anand Kirti, Mr. Aakarsh Mishra, Ms. Vaishnavi and Mr. Ishank Jha, Advs.
CORAM:
HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINDER KAUR
SHALINDER KAUR, J (ORAL)
1. The present application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) and read with Section 483 of BNSS and Section 45 of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) has been filed by the Petitioner/applicant seeking interim Bail for a period of four weeks in the FIR No. 59/2024 dated 12.03.2024 registered under Sections 274/275/276/42/468/471/120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) at Police Station Crime Branch, in view of the medical condition of his Father, who is suffering from Stage-4 Brain Cancer.
2. Mr. Siddharth Agarwal, the learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner, at the outset, submits that since the Father of the Petitioner, who is 58 years of age, is admitted to the hospital, whose medical condition has been deteriorating and is presently in a critical condition in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) on a ventilator, interim Bail be granted to the Petitioner to take care of his ailing Father.
3. He submits that even earlier this Court had granted interim Bail to the Petitioner on this account vide Order dated 12.09.2024 and had been extended by this Court on numerous occasions and the Petitioner had surrendered on 17.02.2025.
4. He further submits that the Petitioners family consists of his Father, a younger Sister who is residing in Australia, his mother who has difficulty in walking due to her own ailments/previous injuries and is suffering from depression due to her husbands exacerbated medical condition as well as Petitioners incarceration. Therefore, he submits, in these prevailing grave and dire circumstances, the responsibility of the Petitioner has increased significantly and she prays that the Petitioner be granted interim Bail for 4 weeks to be in attendance of his Father.
5. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent submits that earlier the Petitioner was granted interim Bail citing himself to be the sole care giver to his Father, however, vide Order dated 28.01.2025, this Court, while revoking the interim Bail granted to the Petitioner, dismissed the Regular Bail and directed the Petitioner to surrender within 7 days from the date of the said Order.
6. The Petitioner, he submits, had also approached the Supreme Court in a Special Leave Petition (SLP) challenging this Courts Order dated 28.01.2025, which came to be dismissed by the Apex Court vide Order dated 07.02.2025 passed in SLP (Crl.) No. 5434/2025, declining to interfere with the said Order and granted the Petitioner two days time to surrender. However, the Petitioner did not comply with the said direction of the Supreme Court and only surrendered on 17.02.2025, i.e. after 8 days. The Investigating Officer also visited the Home of the Petitioner with two Constables but the Petitioner remained untraceable and the mother had no clue as to his whereabouts.
7. He further submits that earlier when the Petitioner was on Bail in the other FIR, he had been involved in committing the offences for which the present FIR has been registered.
8. He submits the Petitioner also moved an application seeking interim Bail before the learned Special Court, PMLA, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi which came to be dismissed vide Order dated 18.03.2025 holding that the allegations against the Petitioner are grave and he may tamper with evidence and influence witnesses and moreover, his family members are taking care of his ailing Father.
9. Nonetheless, he submits that the Respondent has verified that the factum that Petitioners Father is currently in ICU and is on a ventilator. He also submits that his Father is attended by his Wife, Daughter and Daughter-in-Law. Therefore, learned counsel submits, keeping in view of the totality of facts and circumstances, benefit of interim Bail should not be granted to the Petitioner.
10. This Court has heard the submissions advanced by both the parties and perused the record, Status Report and the Certificate dated 27.03.2025 filed today, the same is taken on record.
11. At this stage, it is relevant to note that the Petitioner had been granted interim Bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide Order dated 12.09.2024, which was extended vide Orders dated 07.10.2024, 14.11.2024, 18.11.2024, 19.11.2024, 25.11.2024, 03.12.2024, 11.12.2024 and 23.12.2024 and the petitioner surrendered late on 17.02.2025.
12. Nominal Roll dated 27.03.2025 reflects that the Petitioner has no criminal antecedents and his jail conduct during the last one year is Satisfactory.
13. The Certificate issued by Consultant, Medical Oncology, Manipal Hospital dated 27.03.2025 reads as under:-
Mr. Vijay Kumar Narula, 58 year/Male, MH013543222 is a known case of Gliosarcoma Progressive disease. Post surgery and Adjuvant Chernoradation. Now he was progressed on Chemotherapy. MRI Bain Plain/contrast and Spectroscopy is showing Disease Progression. Now he is shifted to ICU today due to rapid deterioration in consciousness. On examination GCS 3/3 E1V1M1, Bilateral pupil dilated. Not responding to verbal commands and Painful Stimuli, SPO2 75% room air. Antibiotics are escalated. Poor condition and Guarded prognosis explained to the family in detail.
14. However, today the condition of the Father of the Petitioner is stated to be critical and deteriorating very quickly. The factum of his Father being on a ventilator in the ICU has been verified by the Respondent as also the medical condition of the Father being critical.
15. In these prevailing circumstances and on humanitarian grounds, the Petitioner is granted interim Bail for a period of 10 days from the date of his release, subject to Petitioner furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 1 Lakhs, with two sureties in the like amount, to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court / CMM / Duty Magistrate, subject to the following conditions: –
i. The Petitioner shall not leave the NCT of Delhi.
ii. The Petitioner is directed to give all his mobile numbers to the Investigating Officer and keep it operational at all times.
iii. The Petitioner shall not contact, nor visit, nor offer any inducement, threat or promise to any of the prosecution witnesses or other person acquainted with the facts of case. The Petitioner shall not tamper with evidence nor otherwise indulge in any act or omission that is unlawful or that would prejudice the proceedings in the pending trial.
iv. The Petitioner shall report at the Police Station Crime Branch, Delhi everyday between 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM. The concerned officer shall release the Petitioner after recording his presence and after completion of all the necessary formalities.
v. The Petitioner shall surrender before the Jail Superintendent concerned after expiry of the period of interim Bail of 10 days.
16. Needless to state, any observation made hereinabove shall not tantamount to be an expression on the merits of the case before the learned Trial Court and has been made for the consideration of the interim Bail alone in the prevailing circumstances.
17. Copy of the order be sent to the Jail Superintendent concerned for information and necessary compliance.
18. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
19. Order be given dasti under the signatures of the Court Master.
SHALINDER KAUR, J
MARCH 28, 2025
SU/KM
Click here to check corrigendum, if any
BAIL APPLN. 1159/2025 Page 1 of 6