Back
2016 Supreme(Del) 1206
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
P.S.TEJI, J.
TEJPAL @ LEELU & ANR - Petitioners
Versus
STAE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) - Respondent
BAIL APPLN. 2693/2015
Decided On : 4-3-2016
Mr.Manoj Ohri, Sënior Advocate with Mr.N.S. Jaglan, Advocate
Ms.Meenakshi Chauhan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State with Inspector Upender Singh, Police Station Mehrauli, Delhi.
The admissibility and weight of dying declaration, the requirement for corroboration, and the seriousness of the allegations are crucial legal principles established in the judgment.
Headnote:
Bail - Criminal Procedure - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 439 - IPC Section 302/34 - FIR No.2113/2014 - Section 323/342, 307/34, 302 - The court discussed the admissibility and weight of dying declaration, the principle underlying it, and the requirement for corroboration. The court also considered the seriousness of the allegations and the pending trial in reaching the decision to dismiss the bail application.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought bail in a case involving charges under IPC Section 302/34. The deceased alleged that the petitioner and others poured kerosene oil on her and set her on fire, leading to her death. The petitioner contended that the deceased falsely implicated him due to a property dispute and vengeance.
Finding of the Court:
The court observed that the dying declaration attributed specific roles to the accused, but also emphasized the need for corroboration. It noted the seriousness of the allegations and the pending trial, leading to the dismissal of the bail application.
Issues: The issues involved the admissibility and weight of the dying declaration, the requirement for corroboration, and the seriousness of the allegations.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the principle underlying dying declaration and the need for corroboration, while considering the seriousness of the allegations and the pending trial.
Final Decision: The bail application filed by the petitioners was dismissed.
P.S. TEJI, J.
1. By this petition filed under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Cr. P.C.) the petitioner seeks bail in FIR No.2113/2014 under Section 302/34 of IPC, at Police Station Mehrauli, New Delhi.
2. The present case was initially registered under Section 323/342 of IPC on the statement of the victim Kamla. According to her statement, her husband who was employed in Akashvani was admitted in Batra hospital due to heart and breathing problem. It was also stated by the victim that they have a plot near their house, at which her devar (brother-in-lw) Tejpal and his family including his wife and his sons Sainky and Manjeet had taken possession and on 04.11.2014 at about 12 noon, when the complainant went at the plot and asked these four persons to vacate the plot, then all the four persons started quarreling with her. According to her, when she came inside the house, all the above mentioned four persons entered in her house following her and Tejpal (petitioner herein) brought with him a plastic bottle of kerosene oil and his wife Savita asked to murder the complainant. It is also alleged that firstly, Manjeet attacked the complainant with blade on her chest and caught hold of her, and Tejpal poured kerosene oil upon her and Sainky lit a fire by match stick, on the instigation of Savita and thereafter they fled away after setting her on fire. It is further submitted that she came out on the road and extinguished the fire by water and an ambulance came and admitted her in the hospital. It is specifically alleged by the complainant that her devar Tejpal, his wife Savita and their two sons Manjeet and Sanky together with the intention to kill her poured kerosene oil on her and set her on fire.
3. The investigation was conducted and during investigation, it was revealed that there is a plot which belongs to Phool Kumar who has two sons namely Prem Raj and Tejpal @ Leelu. According to an order passed by the Civil Court, Phool Kumar wanted partition of the plot in two equal shares among his two sons by constructing DPC but the victim Kamla wife of Prem Raj disagreed to the same. It was further revealed that at the spot, no offence was found to have been committed but after sometime on receipt of DD No.24A and 25B, ASI – Rajpal alongwith Constable reached at the place of occurrence at Falsa Chowk, Rajpur Khurd Village, where PCR van had already taken the injured to hospital. During local investigation, the ASI saw that a woman came out on the road from inside of the house in burning position, who extinguished the fire by water on the road. CAT ambulance van came and took the injured lady to hospital. Regarding MLC of the injured Kamla, the doctor opined A/H/O Homicidal burn. The injured had L/E 90% deep thermal burn facial burn and grievous injuries and when doctor declared the patient fit for statement, the statement of the injured was recorded. Thereafter impression of left leg had been taken due to burning of injured’s hands. Prima facie, the case was found to be made out under Section 307/34 of IPC. Statement of the injured Kamla was also recorded by Shri Ajit Singh, Executive Magistrate, Saket on 07.11.2014, wherein she disclosed the aforesaid.
4. The injured Kamla (complainant herein) ultimately succumbed to her injuries on 09.11.2014. Her post mortem was conducted and thereafter, Section 302 of IPC was added in the present case.
5. During investigation, the accused Ajay @ Sanky was formally arrested as he was already arrested in another case under Arms Act in Uttar Pradesh. The petitioner herein was arrested only after proclamation were published against him, i.e., on 25.05.2015. Charge sheet was filed on 05.08.2015. Co-accused Savita surrendered before the Court on 29.09.2015. Thereafter supplementary charge sheet was filed on 19.10.2015. However, Manjit @ Meenu is still absconding.
6. Mr. Manoj Ohri, Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner contended that the a
