The gravity and seriousness of the offence, the nature of the accusation and evidence, and the possibility of securing the accused's presence at trial are crucial factors in deciding bail applications in non-bailable offences.

JUDGMENT

Rajnish Bhatnagar, J. - This petition is filed by petitioner seeking regular bail in FIR No. 268/2020 under Section 302 IPC and Sections 25/27/54/59 Arms Act registered at police station Gulabi Bagh.

2. In brief the facts of the case are that on 11.12.2020 SI Anjani Kumar received a PCR Call that "metro pillar no 142 Pratap Nagar Ek admi ko Goli Lagi Hai". Thereafter, he along with other staff reached the spot where victim later identified as Vikas Garg was found injured with gunshot at the spot with his motor cycle nearby. It is alleged that Vikas was shifted to Hindu Rao Hospital where he was declared brought dead and no eyewitnesses were found at the spot. Thus, the case FIR No. 268/20 under Section 302 IPC and Sections 25/27/54/59 Arms Act was registered.

3. During the investigation of the case, on 13.12.2020 an eye witness, namely, Kamlesh was found, who narrated the whole incident, that he plied Vikram Tempo and carried goods. On 11.12.2020 four bike riders on two motor cycles tried to rob the deceased of his bag and when he did not leave the bag one of them shot him and they all fled away taking the bag with them. He also disclosed the number of one motor cycle as DL5SBT 3904, hence on 14.12.2020 initially the accused Harish was arrested on the basis of ownership of the motor cycle which belonged to his bhabhi Pushpa, and Sections 392/395/396/412/120B/34 IPC were added in the case.

4. During further investigation, it was revealed that deceased Vikas Garg used to work in the factory of Vipin Goel and on 11.12.2020 he was asked to collect payment of Rs 99,700/- from one Ramesh Kumar, Chandni Chowk. It is alleged that Vikas had collected the money and was returning to his workplace on his motor cycle. Ishwar Singh started following him and he also passed this information to Harish from his mobile No 8527611968 on Harish's mobile number 7838563583. When the deceased Vikas Garg reached Banda Veer Vairagi Marg Metro Pillar No 142, he was robbed of his bag by both the motor cycle riders and when he did not leave the bag he was shot by the accused Gaurav and all four of them fled away from the spot.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and perused the status report filed by the State.

6. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that applicant is in judicial custody since 16.12.2020. It is further submitted that he is a permanent resident of Delhi and has deep roots in society. It is further submitted that petitioner was working as a Security Guard with Panth Hospital at the time of his arrest and that he is not named in FIR and he does not have any criminal background. It is further submitted that there is no legally sustainable evidence against the accused and no purpose would be served by keeping him in judicial custody.

7. On the other hand, while opposing the bail application, learned APP for the State submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are grave and serious in nature as he is the person who has given information about deceased to co- accused. It is further submitted that the applicant is actively involved in the heinous offence of murdering the deceased to rob him, as he was the one who passed the information to the other accused persons.

8. It is further submitted by learned APP that mobile phone Vivo bearing Mobile no 8527611968 which was used to make call to Harish on the day of offence was recovered from applicant's possession and his CDR of the phone confirms the call made and his location at the place where victim was present prior to his death.

9. As far as the question of grant of bail under Sections 437 Cr.P.C and 439 Cr.P.C is concerned, the law in this regard has been settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in various judgments and has laid down various considerations for grant or refusal of bail to an accused in non-bailable offences like:

(i) Whether