Delhi Court grants bail to accused in ATM break cum dacoity case

New Delhi [India], September 11 (ANI): Delhi's Saket District court has recently granted bail to an accused in an ATM break cum dacoity case. It is alleged that the ATM was broken from Govind Puri and taken to Bulandshahr. The accused had provided a stolen car to other accused persons to carry ATM machine.
Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Vipin Kharb granted bail to Ravikant alias Pankaj, noting that the other two accused are on bail and he has been in judicial custody since June 2, 2025.
"Considering that the accused/applicant was arrested on the disclosure statement of co-accused persons and till now nothing incriminating has been recovered from him, and he is in JC for more than 3 months, applicant/accused Ravikant alias Pankaj is admitted to bail, subject to furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 30,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Ld. MM/Link MM/Duty MM," ASJ Kharb ordered on September 9.
As per the Delhi Police reply, co-accused Farman and Ashif were arrested, and a car with a fake number plate was recovered at their instance. The number plate was manipulated by co-accused Farman. CCTV footage was also obtained by the police.

Co-accused Ashif, Suraj, Raja, Deepak and Ravi hatched a conspiracy to break the ATM, and the accused provided the stolen vehicle along with a duplicate number plate. After committing the theft, they distributed the cash of Rs 3.71 lakhs among themselves, police alleged.
Advocate Govind Sharma, counsel for the accused, submitted that the investigation in the present case has been completed and the chargesheet has already been filed. The accused was arrested in the present case based on the disclosure statement of co-accused Asif and Farman, and both have already been granted bail vide order dated July 23, 2025.
The accused has been in JC since June 2, 2025. No purpose would be served by keeping the
applicant/accused behind bars. Therefore, it is prayed that bail be also granted to the accused on the ground of parity, the counsel argued.
On the other hand, the Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) opposed the bail because there are serious allegations against the accused; therefore, the bail application should not be allowed. (ANI)