The main legal point established in the judgment is the consideration of the nature of the relationship between the accused and the deceased, the statements of witnesses recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., and the possibility of witness influence in granting bail.

JUDGMENT

Talwant Singh, J.: The applicant has moved the present bail application in case FIR No. 344/2021, PS Narela, which was registered on 02.08.2021 under Section 306 but later on Sections 323/341/354D/392/506/509 IPC were also added. This is the first bail application moved before the High Court; prior to this, two bail applications moved by the applicant before learned ASJ have been rejected. The accused had himself surrendered before the officials of PS Narela on 10.08.2021 and since then he is in custody.

2. As per the applicant, the case in brief of the prosecution is that on 01.08.2021, an incident took place, when the deceased hanged herself with rope and on 02.08.2021, FIR No. 344/2021, PS Narela was registered against the accused. The charge-sheet in the present case has already been filed. The first bail application moved before learned ASJ, Rohini Court was dismissed on 30.09.2021. Thereafter, regular bail application which was filed after filing of the charge-sheet, was also dismissed by the learned ASJ, North District vide order dated 01.12.2021. The statement of the child witness, daughter of the deceased, was recorded by the Magistrate at much belated stage and, therefore, tutoring and manipulations cannot be ruled out. The police could have very well examined the child witness immediately after the incident.

2.1. The statement of the child witness was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. before the learned Magistrate on 09.08.2021 in which the child witness had referred to the applicant as `Bhaiya' and had stated the following incriminating things against the applicant:

"The Bhaiya then came home and said to my mother that I will tell your husband wrong things about you and said that I will tell your husband that you roaming around with boys then he left.

.....

Whenever Bhaiya used to come home he forcefully take phone and also once he beat Mummy because of which her eye went blue this happened 1 to 2 month before. Bhaiya threatened that I will have you killed, your children and Husband have no idea how big Don I am. He used to tell Mummy to marry him I had an idea since one year that something wrong is going on."

2.2. Another witness examined by the police is one Ms. Kavita, who was working in the same beauty parlour, where the deceased was working. In her statement dated 09.08.2021 under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she had stated as under:

"....he came home and told Maahi that leave your husband otherwise I will have him and your child killed, Marry me and at that time I, Maahi, her Two Sister-in-laws and daughter Rashmi were at home, Maahi drove him away from that Place at all happened around 3 to 4 pm on 01.08.2021. The boy was continuously calling Maahi even after leaving the place, Maahi was continuously cutting the calls, I told Maahi that we should go to the police Station, Maahi said that today I will tell everything to my husband, I left her house at around 5.15 pm after that I do not know what happened...."

3. Notice was issued to the State and Status report has been filed on behalf of prosecution. It is mentioned that the complainant, husband of the deceased, had stated that when deceased told about the acts of petitioner to her friend Kavita, she advised her that she should tell all the things to her husband. He further stated that on the day of incident, i.e., on 01.08.2021 also, petitioner telephoned the deceased number of times and had also come to his house and had threatened his wife that he will tell all her secrets to complainant and thus due to shame his wife committed suicide.

3.1. On the basis of this statement, an FIR was registered under Section 306 IPC. The petitioner was arrested on 10.08.2021; CDRs of the mobile phones of the petitioner and deceased were obtained and upon analysis thereof, it was found that both of them were having regular talks with each other and on the day of the incident, just few minutes before, the petitioner had made several calls to the deceased and even visited the h