Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(Del) 1164

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J.
Sunny – Appellant
Versus
The State of NCT of Delhi – Respondent
Bail Appln. 56 of 2023
Decided On : 13-03-2023

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Mohit Mathur, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sudarshan Rajan, Mr. Hitain Bajaj, Mr. Dinesh Chandra Sharma, Mr. Siddhant Gaudas, Advocates, for the Petitioner.
Mr. Raghuvinder Varma, APP for the State with ACP Yashwant Sival, SDPO Kalyanpuri.

The court's discretion in granting bail is based on the nature of the accusation, severity of punishment, and the accused's criminal antecedents.

Headnote:
BAIL - Criminal Law - Sections 323/341/34, IPC, Section 307 IPC, Section 3 (1) (s), 3 (1) (u), 3 (2) (v) and 3 (2) (va) of SC/ST Act - The court granted bail to the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. considering the nature of the accusation, severity of punishment, and lack of previous involvement in any case.
Fact of the Case:

A quarrel took place between two parties resulting in injuries to the victims. The accused were alleged to have used casteist remarks and assaulted the victims with sticks and an electric wire.
Finding of the Court:

The court granted bail to the petitioner based on the nature of the accusation, the location of injuries, the petitioner's custody duration, and the absence of previous involvement in any case.
Issues: Bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in a case involving serious allegations of assault and casteist remarks.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the nature of the accusation, severity of punishment, and the absence of previous involvement in any case as key factors in granting bail.
Final Decision: The petitioner was granted regular bail with specific conditions.

JUDGMENT

Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J. (Oral)--Present application has been filed seeking regular bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in case FIR No.609/2022 under Sections 323/341/34, IPC, Police Station New Ashok Nagar.

2. Briefly stated, the facts are that a quarrel had taken place between the two parties on 10.09.2022 and injured were taken to LBS hospital by a PCR Van. In the hospital one Vimal Chand along with his wife namely Neeta were found admitted. On the MLC, the doctor had mentioned history of assault at home and the nature of injuries were under observations. In the same hospital one Rajpal and his son Sanjay were also found admitted. Since, none of the parties made any statement, the PCR call was kept pending. However, on 11.09.2022, some videos came to notice through social media wherein Vimal Chand was seen to be beaten by some persons with stick like object. SI Navdeep contacted victim Vimal Chand for his statement, who still did not make any statement saying that he was busy in his treatment. However, the Police registered an FIR No.609/2022 under Sections 323/341/34, IPC, Police Station New Ashok Nagar. On 12.09.2022, Vimal Chand lodged a written complaint wherein he alleged that one person namely Lokesh son of late Rajendra Kumar, who is a rape accused in an FIR and where Vimal Chand/victim was the lawyer of the complainant, along with Rajpal and his brother Ajaypal and some persons were pressurizing him to withdraw the case. It was stated that on 10.09.2022 at 12:30 PM, Rajpal Ajaypal and Rajpal's two sons, Sunny and Sanjay and along with some other unknown boys entered his house and started abusing and beating him with sticks. The complainant further alleged that one of the sons of the accused Rajpal namely Sanjay was carrying an electric wire in his hand and started pressing his neck with that wire. Somehow, he managed to remove that wire from his neck. Meanwhile, his wife Neeta came to the spot and she was also beaten. It was further alleged that the accused persons took the victim on the road and gave him beatings from stick and fist blows. Thereafter the police was called. On the same day, the complainant Vimal Chand lodged another complaint where he alleged that the accused persons had used casteist remarks.

3. While the matter rested thus, an offence under Section 307 IPC was also added. The offence under Section 3 (1) (s), 3 (1) (u), 3 (2) (v) and 3 (2) (va) of SC/ST Act were also added. The nature of injuries was found to be grievous as the victim suffered injuries to his arms in the form of multiple fractures and is still undergoing treatment.

4. Sh. Mohit Mathur, learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 16.09.2022. The chargesheet has already been filed. The Trial may take a long time and therefore the petitioner may be released on bail.

5. Learned Addl. P.P. for the State has opposed the bail on the ground that the allegations leveled against the petitioner are specific and heinous in nature. Learned Addl. P.P. for the State submits that the petitioner along with his father Rajpal and his brother Sanjay gave beatings to the victim with a stick like object and can be seen beating the victim in the videos. It is submitted that the if the bail is granted to the petitioner, he may threaten the witnesses.

6. The jurisprudence for grant of bail is very well settled. The court while granting bail in the serious cases has to see the peculiar facts and circumstances of each case. The court has to take into account the criminal antecedents of the accused but is primarily confined to the merits of the case in which the accused has been arrested. The parameters of grant of bail is very well settled in Kalyan Chandra Sarkar v. Rajesh Ranjan @ Pappu Yadav and Anr., (2004(7) SCC 528) In para 11 wherein it is stated that "11. The law in regard to grant or refusal of bail is very well settled. The court granting bail should exercise its discretion in a judicious manner

Click Here to Read the rest of this document