The court affirmed that the severity of allegations, potential for witness tampering, and contradictions in medical evidence warranted the denial of bail, irrespective of the claimed false implication by the petitioner.

JUDGMENT

Rajnish Bhatnagar, J. This is a petition filed by the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail in FIR No. 188/2019 under Sections 302/34 IPC registered at Police Station Vivek Vihar, Delhi.

2. In brief the facts of the case are that a PCR call vide DD No. 48A was received on 19.05.2019 at 11.20 PM at P.S. Vivek Vihar from Max Hospital, Parparganj regarding death of Sh. Rajkumar S/o Sh. Laxman Dass R/o 28/88 Kasturba Nagar, Delhi. The I.O, ASI Devidarshan reached the hospital and collected the MLC No. 9115/2019, time 10.10 PM with alleged history of "Pt. was brought dead to ER, alleged history of assault near Jhilmil area. Pt. was hit by someone as per history given by attendant then patient came back home and then took scooty and went out and then fell down from scooty. He suddenly collapsed and was unresponsive since then." Three injury marks were present on deceased's chin, left cheek and chest. The daughter of deceased Ms. Rajni Bal met the I.O in hospital and she alleged that his father had gone for evening walk after having dinner but he returned and told her that he was standing outside Dr. Verma's clinic in Kasturba Nagar where accused Vijay @ Bhuri (petitioner herein) and his associates gave beatings to him with fists and blows and also, hit him with scissors. It is alleged that Vijay @ bhuri stated that this policeman complaints against him so he would kill him. Thereafter, when Rajkumar and Rajni were going to hospital on scooty, Rajkumar fell down, so Rajni took him to Max Hospital, where he expired before the treatment. Later on, the instant case was registered vide FIR No. 188/19 dated 20.05.2019, under Sections 302/34 IPC at P.S Vivek Vihar. The statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C of Rajni Bala was recorded on 20.05.2019, wherein she stated that when her father returned home after the incident, he told her that the accused persons Vijay @ Bhuri and Vinod @ Pahari had beaten him with fist-blows and accused Vijay @ Bhuri also attacked him with scissors.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State and perused the status report filed by the state.

4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and is in judicial custody since 20.05.2019. It is further submitted that as per the MLC bearing no. 9115 dated 19.05.2019, there were only three noted visible injuries on the body of the deceased, i.e., abrasion on chin, abrasion on left cheek and abrasion on chest, however, when the post mortem of the deceased was conducted the doctor who conducted the post-mortem, observed that there were six injuries on the body of the deceased. It is further submitted that the said glaring contradiction between two medical documents should not have been ignored by the Ld. Trial court, as the said contradictions are extremely material in establishing the falsification of the present case. It is further submitted that in the Post Mortem Report, which was prepared by PW Dr. A.S. Bajwa, the opinion of the doctor clearly stated that the cause of death was "syncope as the result of myocardial infraction in a case of pre-existing coronary artery disease" and it was further opined that all the six alleged injuries which were caused to the deceased, were not sufficient in ordinary course of nature to cause death either individually or collectively. It is further submitted that there are material contradictions in the statements of the eye-witnesses, especially in the statement of PW Rajni and PW Vaishali, who are the daughters of the deceased, and the statement of both these witnesse