The Delhi High Court has observed that undertrial prisoners cannot be detained in custody for an indefinite period.

The bench of Justice Amit Mahajan made this observation while granting bail to an accused booked under Sections 420/120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code, and Section 66(D) of Information Technology Act, 2000.

"The undertrial prisoners cannot be detained in custody for an indefinite period.", the Court observed before granting bail to the accused.

In this case, FIR was registered after the complainant alleged to have been dishonestly induced on the pretext of receiving the insurance policy bonus amount and the insurance gratuity value on the lapsed insurance policies from the year 2013 till date.

He claimed that a group of people had called him from different mobile numbers claiming to be senior officials with insurance regulatory body.

They induced him by stating that the unclaimed insurance amount can be released to the complainant.

It was found during the course of the investigation that a total sum of Rs. 1 crore 20 lakhs has been transferred in various accounts by the complainant.

Senior Advocate Viraj R. Datar appeared for the accused whereas Richa Dhawan, APP appeared for the State.

Senior Counsel for the accused-bail applicant submitted that the applicant was in employment of the main accused and has been falsely implicated in the case.

He further submitted that all the other four co-accused have been already enlarged on bail and despite that the applicant is languishing in jail and his application for grant of bail was dismissed by the Trial Court on an erroneous presumption that the applicant is likely to tinker with the ongoing investigation.

The Court noted that "From the very nature of the offence and the allegations made, the entire incriminating material seems to be documentary in nature and is already available with the investigating agency."

The Court further noted that the bail applicant has two minor children therefore, apprehension of him absconding or that he is a flight risk is only a bald assertion.

The Court observed that "The applicant cannot be made to spend the entire period of trial in custody specially when the trial is likely to take considerable time."

Thus the Court held that the accused has made out a case for grant of bail.

Accordingly, the Court granted bail to the accused subject to terms and conditions.

Cause Title- Tarun Dutt v. Govt. of NCT Delhi

Click here to read/download Judgment