The court denied bail based on the seriousness of the murder charge, evidence from eyewitnesses, and the petitioner's history of serious offenses necessitating careful consideration of potential witness tampering.

JUDGMENT

Subramonium Prasad, J. The petitioner seeks bail in FIR No.830/2015 dated 02.10.2015 registered at Police Station Farsh Bazar (East) for offences under Section 302, 34 IPC.

2. The facts in brief leading to the present FIR are as follows:

i. On 01.10.2015 information vide DD No.30 A was received wherein the caller informed that one person has been shot and two persons who were riding bike fled the spot.

ii. On receiving the phone call, the police reached the spot. They found the deceased lying unconscious and was bleeding heavily from his head. The injured was taken to Hedgewar Hospital wherein he was declared brought dead.

iii. The FIR was recorded on the statement of one Bharat Singh who had been despatched to the spot vide DD No.30 A for offence.

iv. Investigation commenced. Accused, namely, i) Azam S/o Karam Ali R/o 749/4, Rehman Building, West Rohtash Nagar, Shahdara, Delhi; ii) Ajay Srivastava S/o Jamuna Prasad R/o JB-6/62, Welcome, Seelampur, Delhi; iii) Munawar Ali S/o Maqsood Ali R/o Pili Mitti, Opposite Mazar, Janta Colony, Welcome, Delhi; iv) Danish S/o Muslim R/o 65-C, Second Floor, Chanakya Marg, Chhajju Gate, Valkem Delhi; v) Shivaji @ Chunnu S/o Late Rakesh R/o Balmiki Basti, Near Railway Line, Shahdara Mandi, Delhi were arrayed as accused on the statement of two eye-witnesses Sandeep @ Dheele and Anil Kumar @ Kale.

v. The accused Azam, Ajay Srivastava i.e. the petitioner herein, Munawar Ali and Danish could not be arrested because they were evading arrest. The proceedings under Section 82 CrPC were initiated. The petitioner herein was arrested on 20.04.2016.

vi. The petitioner has filed several bail applications. The petitioner approached this Court by filing BAIL APPLN 4020/2020 which was rejected by order dated 15.03.2021. This Court found that the wife of the deceased had stated that she and her husband were facing threats for their lives before the incident dated 01.10.2015 took place. This Court also found that the petitioner has been convicted in FIR No.138/2012 registered at Police Station Barakhamba Road for offences under Section 392, 34, 120B IPC and FIR No.25/2011 registered at Police Station Welcome for offences under Section 307, 34 IPC.

vii. Material on record also indicates that the petitioner had been granted interim bail vide order dated 05.04.2021 by this Court in BAIL APPLN. 1015/2021 on the ground that the petitioner has to undergo an operation. The petitioner had also been granted bail on 20.07.2021 for a period of seven weeks for undergoing the surgery.

viii. On 17.12.2021, this Court granted interim bail to the petitioner on the ground that he is getting married on 20.12.2021. The petitioner did not get married.

ix. The petitioner approached the Sessions Court for grant of regular bail by filing an application bearing SC ID No.773/2016 and the same was rejected by an order dated 09.12.2021 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge.

x. The petitioner has approached this Court for grant of bail.

3. Mr. Hari Shanker, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner was taken into custody on 20.04.2016. It is stated that the petitioner has been granted bail by this Court on various occasions and he has never abused the liberty granted to him. He also contends that though the wife of the deceased Shyam Sundar stated that her husband had been threatened by accused Azam and few others but she did not take the name of the petitioner herein. He further states that one of the eyewitnesses has turned hostile. He states that the prosecution witnesses have been examined and no useful purpose would be served keeping the petitioner further in custody.

4. Per contra, Mr. Amit Chadha, learned APP contends that the petitioner is