IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J.
ASHISH KOCHAR – Petitioner
Versus
STATE – Respondent
Bail Application No. 1542 of 2023
Decided On : 20-11-2024
(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 439 - Bail application - The petitioner seeks regular bail for serious offences including murder and attempted murder - The court emphasizes the gravity of the accusations and the potential for evidence tampering - The petitioner's prior conduct raises concerns about the likelihood of influencing witnesses - Bail denied due to the serious nature of the charges and the risk of obstructing justice. (Paras 39, 40, 41)
(B) Bail Jurisprudence - The court reiterates the principles governing bail, including the nature of the accusations, the severity of the punishment, and the risk of tampering with evidence - The court must balance individual liberty against the interests of justice. (Paras 18, 19, 20)
ORDER :
1. By way of the present application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter “Cr.P.C.”) (now Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) read with Section 428 of the Cr.P.C. (now Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023), the petitioner/applicant seeks regular bail in FIR No. 181/2018 registered for offences punishable under Sections 302/307/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter “IPC”) and Sections 27/54/59 of the Arms Act, 1959, at Police Station Mehrauli, Delhi.
2. The brief facts that led to the filing of the present application are as follows:
(b) In the said FIR, it was stated that the petitioner and one Mr. Sandeep Gupta had ongoing conflicts with him and Mr. Jaidev, who was the Vice-President of the RWA, due to disputes over parking space and balcony extensions in their building.
(c) On the date of the incident, i.e. 16th March, 2018, Mr. Rakesh, Mr. Jaidev and Mr. Nitin (Mr. Rakesh’s son) were coming back from an event, when they noticed that Mr. Sandeep and the petitioner were sitting in a car, with one Mr. Anil Kaura standing outside. When they stopped at the corner of C-14 for dropping Mr. Jaidev, it is alleged that they were verbally abused and physically attacked by Mr. Sandeep and the petitioner.
(d) Upon hearing the noise due to the brawl that broke out, Mr. Sumit (hereinafter “the deceased”) who was Mr. Jaidev’s son, and Mr. Gaurav, Mr. Rakesh’s son, arrived at the scene. It is alleged that the petitioner then took out a gun and fired at Mr. Rakesh. Mr. Nitin, Mr Rakesh’s son, saved his father by pushing him down, consequently suffering gunshot injuries to his head and hand. The petitioner subsequently fired another shot, hitting the deceased in the chest, causing him to collapse. The gun fell from petitioner’s hand and Mr. Anil picked it up before all the accused fled in their car from the site where the incident took place.
(e) The deceased and Mr. Nitin were then taken to Fortis Hospital in a private vehicle where Mr. Sumit was declared dead with the postmortem report citing haemorrhagic shock due to gunshot injury sustained to chest, as the cause of death, whereas Mr. Nitin was treated and subsequently discharged. Thereafter, the said FIR was registered at Police Station Mehrauli.
(f) Mr. Sandeep was arrested on 17th March, 2018 and thereafter, on 19th March, 2018, the petitioner and Mr. Anil were also arrested. However, it is pertinent to note that the revolver used in the incident was not recovered. During the course of investigation, the petitioner revealed to the Investigation Officer that he had purchased the weapon from someone named Mr. Ajay and had thrown the same into the wagon of a moving goods train.
(g) On 24th March, 2018, Mr. Jaidev submitted a written statement to the SHO Police Station-Mehrauli, corroborating Mr. Rakesh’s initial statement. Mr. Jaidev, thereafter on 30th March, 2018, submitted his supplementary statement, claiming that after the deceased fell, he heard a loud horn and saw Ms. Nidhi Kochar, wife of the petitioner, urging the petitioner and other accused from the car to quickly finish their task.
(h) Mr. Rakesh Kumar and Mr. Nitin submitted supporting statements on 7th April, 2018, subsequent to which on 18th April, 2018, Mr. Gaurav provided a supplementary statement, supporting Mr. Jaidev's version.
(i) Ms. Nidhi was subsequently arrested on 11th April, 2018 and thereafter, the learned Trial Court vide order dated 4th October, 2018 discharged Ms. Nidhi, whereas charges were f
Kamla Devi v. State of Rajasthan
Kalyan Chandra Sarkar v. Rajesh Ranjan
Prasanta Kumar Sarkar v. Ashis Chatterjee
The court denied bail due to the serious nature of the charges and the risk of evidence tampering, emphasizing the need to balance individual liberty with justice.
Confessional statements of co-accused to police inadmissible under CrPC Section 162 and Evidence Act Section 25; insufficient alone to deny bail without other incriminating material, per bail princip....
Bail denied in murder case as driving co-accused to scene and fleeing infers common intention under Section 34 IPC despite no overt act, given offence gravity and punishment severity.
The court emphasized that bail should not be granted if there is a strong likelihood of witness tampering and the accused is charged with a serious offence.
The court ruled that bail should be denied due to the petitioner's extensive criminal antecedents and involvement in the crime, emphasizing the need for public safety.
The court affirmed that in serious offenses, circumstantial evidence and severity of potential punishment must prevail in bail considerations, denying the petitioner's release amid serious accusation....
(1) While considering an application for grant of bail a prima facie conclusion must be supported by reasons and must be arrived at after having regard to vital facts of case brought on record – Due ....
The decision emphasized the importance of considering the nature of the offence, severity of the punishment, and the likelihood of the accused interfering with the process of justice when deciding on....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.