IMPORTANT POINT
At the bail stage, detailed analysis of witness testimonies and recoveries should be avoided, and each criminal case should be considered on its own merits.

ORDER

Rajnish Bhatnagar, J.

1. The present bail application has been filed by the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C for grant of regular bail in case FIR No. 330/2021 U/s 302 IPC registered at Police Station Maurya Enclave.

2. In brief, the facts of the case are that on 25.04.2021, an information vide DD No. 13 A at 06:36 a.m. was received in the police station Maurya Enclave, Delhi regarding a dead body lying in SU Park, Pitampura, Delhi. IO alongwith the staff reached at the spot, where dead body of a male was found lying. On the inspection of the dead body injury mark was found present on forehead and one piece of cloth was tied around the neck of the deceased.

3. On enquiry, the deceased was identified as Saksham Gupta S/o Manish Gupta R/o TU-76, Ground Floor, Pitampura, Delhi, age 18 years who was found to be missing vide DD No. 48 A, Dated 21.04.2021, PS Maurya Enclave. On the statement of complainant Manish Gupta (father of the deceased) the present case was registered and investigation was taken up. The complainant in his statement has specifically named the petitioner to be responsible for the death of his son.

4. I have heard the Ld. counsel for the petitioner, Ld. APP for the state assisted by the Ld. counsel for the complainant, perused the Status Report and also perused the records of this case.

5. It is submitted by the Ld. counsel for the petitioner that the star witnesses of the prosecution i.e. PW 1 and PW 2 during their cross examination have made various contradictions which belies the case of the prosecution. It is further submitted that PW 1 has stated in his cross examination that he was informed about the dead body by a lady but the investigating agency has not made any efforts to search for the said lady nor her statement was recorded. It is further submitted that as per PW 1, where the dead body was found there were jhuggies wherein 5-6 persons were living and they left the jhuggies 2-3 days prior to the day of recovery of dead body but the investigating agency did not make any efforts to search for those persons. It is further submitted that PW-1 has stated in his cross examination that his signatures were taken on blank papers by the police officials. It is further submitted that the testimony of PW 2 clearly belies the case of the prosecution. It is further submitted that the prosecution in a planned manner has shown false recovery from the petitioner vide seizure memo dated 26.04.2021 of ear pods and mobile phone of the deceased which is contrary to the statement of PW-2. According to PW-2 the recovery of ear pods and mobile phone were made on 25.04.2021 when the dead body was recovered. It is further submitted that there is no eye witness to the crime and the petitioner has been arrested only on the hypothesis of his chatting with the deceased. Ld. counsel for the petitioner has relied upon: Babu Singh Vs. State of U.P., (1978) 5 SCC 579 and Hussainara Khatoon and Others Vs. Home Secretary, State of Bihar, Patna. He has also relied upon Sumer Singh Vs. State, Bail application No. 750/2007 decided by this Court on 03.09.2007; Mahesh Gupta Vs. State, Bail Application No. 2585/2008 decided by this Court on 01.04.2009 and Jyoti Vs. State, NCT of Delhi, Bail Application. No. 4172/2020 decided by this Court on 04.08.2021.

6. It is further submitted by the Ld. counsel for the petitioner that GD No. 0048A was the first document prepared in this case which was recorded on the basis of the statement of the father of the deceased who has not placed any suspicion on anybody, so it is argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated. It is also submitted by the Ld. counsel for the petitioner that the arrest memo, personal search memo have been witnessed by Jeet Pal but seizure memo of mobile phone make Samsung with black cover and the ear pods of the deceased has not been witnessed by the said Jeet Pal which clearly shows that this document has been manipulated as the IO has failed to obtain the signatures of