A Delhi Court has rejected the bail application of a symptomatic patient of COVID19 virus, who was arrested for trying to escape the quarantine centre, creating ruckus, and beating up police officials.
While rejecting the bail, the Duty Magistrate Rishabh Kapoor at Tis Hazari Court noted that:
'The material on record prima facie show that the accused has indulged in serious offences of attacking the public officials working in the present time of COVID crisis. Besides, prima facie it also emerges that the accused tried to escape the quarantine facility, despite being a symptomatic patient of COVID19, which in itself is an act prejudicial to the interest of the community at large.'
The accused had moved a bail application under section 437 of the Criminal Procedure Code stating that he has been in custody for 12 days for offences he is falsely implicated with.
In the status report, the Investigating Officer informed the court that the accused, along with the co-accused, have broken the CCTV cameras of the shelter home, where they were placed under quarantine facility.
It was further informed that the accused caught hold of the police officials and pelted stones at them, due to which, many officers sustained injuries.
While stating that the accused has committed offences under sections 186/332/353/188/269/270 of the IPC, the police submitted that the accused also tried to jump from the 3rd floor of the quarantine centre with the intention to escape.
Opposing these submissions, the counsel for the accused/applicant argued that the accused had been falsely implicated as it has not been explained by the police as to how the accused came to possess bricks and stones in the shelter home.
Citing his clean record and no criminal antecedents, the accused further sought to substantiate his argument of false implication by submitting that the police is yet to seize the CCTV cameras.
Apart from the arguments, the court also took into consideration the medical report which showed that certain police officers in fact have sustained injuries.
While denying bail to the accused, the court highlighted that the offences he's charged with are serious and grave, especially in the context of the ongoing crisis.
The court also relied upon the judgement of the Supreme Court in CBI v. Amaramani Tripathi, wherein it was stated that, while adjudicating on bail, the court has to consider factors such as behaviour, character and the likelihood of repeating the offense.