Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(Del) 675

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
YOGESH KHANNA, J.
Hitesh Pratap Singh Chauhan - Petitioner
Versus
State NCT of Delhi - Respondent
Bail Appln. No. 147 of 2023
Decided On : 24-04-2023

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Pramod Kumar Dubey, Senior Advocate with Mr. Kanhaiya Singhal, Ms. Pallavi Garg, Ms. Aditi and Mr. Udit Bakshi, Mr. Mukesh Kumar APP with Inspector Parmod Kumar, AHTU Crime Branch, Mr. Rajiv Mohan, Mr. Swapnil Tripathi, Mr. Shalini Sinha, Ms. Aranya Sinha and Mr. Kunal Malik.

The discretion of the High Court to grant bail must be exercised with the due application of mind and in compliance with the conditions laid down by the Court. The grant of bail is to be secured within the bounds of the law and must balance public interest in the administration of justice and the protection of individual liberty pending adjudication of the case.

Headnote:
Bail - Criminal Conspiracy - IPC 364/302/201/120B/34 - The court discussed the provisions of IPC sections 364, 302, 201, 120B, and 34 in the context of the alleged criminal conspiracy and murder. The court emphasized the importance of prima facie evidence and the discretion of the High Court in granting bail.
Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought bail in a case involving criminal conspiracy and murder under various sections of the IPC. The prosecution presented circumstantial evidence linking the petitioner to the crime, including mobile phone records and location data.
Finding of the Court:

The court found that the circumstantial evidence collected by the prosecution prima facie established the chain of events and the involvement of the petitioner in the alleged criminal conspiracy and murder. The court emphasized the importance of prima facie evidence and the discretion of the High Court in granting bail.
Issues: The issues involved the sufficiency of circumstantial evidence, the discretion of the High Court in granting bail, and the balance between public interest in the administration of justice and the protection of individual liberty pending adjudication of the case.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that at the stage of the trial, the petitioner was not entitled to bail based on the prima facie evidence and the nature and gravity of the offense. The court emphasized the need to balance numerous factors in the exercise of discretionary power to grant bail on a case-by-case basis.
Final Decision: The petition for bail was dismissed, and pending application, if any, was also disposed of. The court clarified that its decision should not be treated as an observation on the merits of the case.

JUDGMENT :

Yogesh Khanna, J.

Petitioner seeks regular bail in case FIR No. 216/2019 under Section 364/302/201/120B/34 IPC registered at police station Greater Kailash-I, Delhi.

2. The learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits there is no direct evidence against the petitioner and the alleged circumstantial evidence raised against him is a bleak one, hence pending trial, the petitioner be granted bail.

3. The facts of the case reveal on 16.11.2019. the complainant came to the police station Greater Kailash-I, New Delhi and reported her brother Sh. Arun Kumar Sharma age-64 years had left his residence at Kailash Colony, New Delhi for the purpose of attending execution proceedings at Gurugram Courts. On 15.11.2019., he left the house at around 08.35 AM to board a Metro train from Kailash Colony Metro Station. He was scheduled to meet his lawyer at M.G. Road Metro Station and had been missing ever since. She further stated there was an on-going dispute between his brother Arun Sharma and one Rishi Rajpal Singh Chauhan and his wife Chander Bala with regard to property at Sector-17, Urban Estate, Gurugram.

4. That during the course of investigation, the investigation officer had collected various material to allegedly complete the chain of events viz the CCTV footage and CDR and Cell Location Chart of accused Amet Vikram Chhabra, Sahil Kumar @ Bunty; Priyank Khanna @ Prince; Harsh Chhabra; Rishi Raj Pal Chauhan and petitioner herein. The allegations are all accused person hatched a criminal conspiracy in the month of October 2019, hence the location of petitioner, Amet Vikram Chhabra, Priyank Khanna @ Prince, Sahil Kumar @ Bunty and the deceased at DRT and thereafter at the residence of the deceased are all relevant.

5. It is an admitted case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court passed an Order dated 25.09.2019. in favour of the deceased with respect to property bearing No. 1094/A, Sector 17, Urban Estate, Gurugram and for the purpose of execution of the said order, Gurugram Court had fixed the matter for 15.11.2019.. Thus, the accused decide the deceased be eliminated. Consequently, petitioner met Harsh Chhabra who agreed to help him out. Rishi Rajpal Singh Chauhan also discussed the matter with his son Hitesh, viz the present petitioner who also agreed with him and hence a conspiracy was hatched to kill Arun Sharma. A deal was struck between petitioner and his father on the one side and Harsh Chhabra on the other side for a sum of Rs. 25.00 Lacs for committing the murder of Arun Sharma. It is alleged Rs. 1.00 Lac was given to Amet Vikram Chhabra, Priyank Khanna @ Prince by the father of the petitioner and the balance amount was to be given afterwards.

6. It is the case of prosecution the petitioner and Harsh Chhabra came in contact and 8 calls were exchanged on 28.10.2019. between them. On 31.10.2019. morning, both Rishi Raj Pal Singh Chauhan and the petitioner took Amet Vikram Chhabra, Sahil Kumar @ Bunty and Priyank Khanna @ Prince to DRT, Jeevan Tara Building, New Delhi where the deceased had a hearing. The petitioner pointed at the deceased and Amet Vikram Chhabra, Sahil Kumar @ Bunty and Priyank Khanna @ Prince followed the deceased in the Court and then all the way back to his Kailash Colony home on a TSR to see his house. On 31.10.2019. the location of mobile phones of Amet Vikram Chhabra, Sahil Kumar @ Bunty, Priyank Khanna, and of petitioner viz 9873685044 was at Jantar Mantar/Sanchar Bhawan/Patel Chowk Metro Station from 09.36AM to 03.58PM. The location of mobile number of the deceased on 31.10.2019. at relevant time was also at Jantar Mantar, New Delhi. Further, on 31.10.2019. the petitioner through his mobile 9873685044 made 20 calls to Amet Vikram Chabra at his mobile phone. Thereafter it is alleged all three Amet Vikram Chabbra, Priyank Khanna @ Prince and Sahil Kumar @ Bunty had gone to Kailsah Colony to recce the area and the house of the victim and hence the location of mobile of Priyank Khanna @ Prince was at Kailash Colo

Click Here to Read the rest of this document