The court granted bail due to insufficient evidence linking the petitioner to the murder, emphasizing the importance of direct evidence over hearsay.

JUDGMENT :

Manisha Batra, J.

The instant one is the second petition that has been filed by the petitioner under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No. 82 dated 17.03.2023, registered under Sections 302 and 34 of IPC at Police Station Dharuheri, District Rewari. The first petition, bearing CRM-M-63262-2023, was dismissed as withdrawn on 04.04.2024.

2. Brief facts of the case relevant for the disposal of the present petition are that the aforementioned was registered on the basis of a written complaint lodged by complainant Manoj Kumar on 17.03.2023 alleging therein that on the previous evening, he had come to know about the death of Maharaj Shri Balvir Nath, Mahant of the temple of village Dhakya and had intimated the police. He had thereafter made inquiries at his level and had come to know that accused Dheeraj, Hari Om, Jasbir and petitioner Kuldeep had been quarrelling with the deceased after consuming liquor in the temple premises and due to injuries sustained at their hands, the victim had died. Investigation proceedings were initiated. The post-mortem examination of the dead body of the victim and inquest proceedings were conducted. The petitioner and co-accused Hari Om were arrested on 17.03.2023. The petitioner suffered disclosure statement admitting his involvement in the murder of the victim after consuming liquor along with the victim. He disclosed that on asking of the victim, he had gone to a liquor vend to get beer and on reaching back, he was informed by co-accused Jasbir that the victim had slapped him. Thereafter, the petitioner and co-accused Hari Om had an altercation with the victim. They had pushed him on the ground. Co-accused Hari Om sat on his chest. He himself had broken a bottle of beer and inflicted blows with the same on the chest of the victim, due to impact of which, the victim had lost his consciousness. Some more injuries were also inflicted on his person by them. The petitioner also got recovered the broken beer bottle at his instance. Two of the persons named by the complainant were found to be innocent. The investigation stands completed and the petitioner along with co-accused is facing trial for murder of the victim.

3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of the statement allegedly recorded by complainant Manoj Kumar. The complainant has appeared as PW-1 before the learned trial Court. The testimony of the complainant clearly establishes that he did not witness the occurrence. His information was hearsay in nature. He has not named any person, who had seen the petitioner quarrelling with the victim and committing his murder. The case is based on circumstantial evidence and there is no circumstance to connect him with the subject crime. The trial will take considerable time. His further incarceration, which is already prolonged one, would not serve any useful purpose. It is, therefore, urged that the petition deserves to be allowed.

4. Status report has been filed by the respondent-State. It is submitted therein and learned Assistant Advocate General, Haryana has argued that there are serious allegations against the petitioner. He was named by the complainant. The circumstances point out his involvement in the subject crime. It is, thus, argued that the petition is liable to be dismissed.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at considerable length and have also perused the material placed on record.

6. The petitioner along with co-accused Hari Om is alleged to have entered into an altercation with the victim on the fateful night and is further alleged to have committed his murder by causing injuries to him with a broken bottle of beer. As per the allegations, the victim had consumed liquor along with co-accused on the night of the incident. The complainant had named the petitioner as one of the assailants. He has been examined before the learned trial Court as P