Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
SURESH KUMAR KAIT
Shabuddine – Appellant
Versus
State of NCT Delhi – Respondent
The hearing has been conducted through video conferencing.
1. Petitioner is seeking bail in FIR No. 119/2020, registered at police station Khajuri Khas, Delhi for the offences under Sections 147 /148/149/302/153A/505/120B/34 IPC and Sections 27 /30 ARMS ACT on the ground that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He is in custody since 20.03.2020.
2. Notice issued.
3. Mr. Amit Mahajan, learned Special Public Prosecutor for respondent/State accepts notice.
4. With the consent of both the sides, the present petition has been taken up for final hearing and disposal.
5. The crux of the prosecution case is that FIR in question has been registered at the instance of one Pappu, who has alleged that on 25.02.2020 at about 02:15 PM, when his brother, Babu, who is an auto driver by profession, reached Khajuri Khas, he was attacked by the mob and received grievous injuries. Thereafter, on 27.02.2020 he succumbed to the injuries sustained during treatment in the hospital.
6. As per the charge sheet, during investigation in the present case, through some source in social media, one video of riots dated 25.02.2020 came on record and the said was s
Bail can be granted based on absence of direct evidence and parity with co-accused who have been released, emphasizing presumption of innocence.
Grant of Bail - Offence of Rioting and Murder - There is no direct evidence like CCTV footage etc. coupled with fact that co-accused of petitioner have been granted bail in this FIR case, court view ....
The court grants bail due to lack of distinguishing evidence for the petitioner compared to co-accused already granted bail, emphasizing the prolonged nature of the trial.
The court determined that the completion of investigation in a riot-related case allows for reconsideration of bail, even after previous denials, emphasizing the need for substantial evidence against....
Bail granted – Conspiracy and Murder - Accused persons have already been granted bail and Special Public Prosecutor is unable to distinguish role assigned to petitioner in this FIR case.
The court emphasized that bail should be granted when evidence is insufficient or witnesses' reliability is questionable, especially in serious cases involving substantial allegations.
The main legal point established is that bail can be granted based on the lack of substantial evidence and the unreliability of key witnesses, even in cases involving serious charges.
Unlawful assembly - Grant of bail - No independent eye-witness identification of applicant.
Bail should be granted when pre-trial detention is extensive, and animosity between parties raises concerns of false allegations, ensuring fair process until trial completion.
Bail can be granted where prosecution fails to establish a prima facie case against the accused, particularly in light of similar circumstances of co-accused already released on bail.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
