Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 11413
DELHI HIGH COURT
PRADEEP – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE NCT OF DELHI – Respondent
BAIL_APPLN-2624_2023
In cases of circumstantial evidence, the court must carefully consider the evidence and determine whether it is sufficient to establish the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt.
Headnote:
BAIL - MURDER - CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE - [SUMMARY]
Fact of the Case:
The applicant was arrested for the murder of the deceased, whose body was found with injury marks on the neck and face. The police investigation revealed that the applicant, along with his brother, had picked up the deceased and assaulted him while drinking and roaming in the car. The applicant and his brother then took the deceased to Gurgaon and killed him by using a belt, which was later recovered from the applicant's residence. The applicant's car was also found to have blood stains, and the FSL report confirmed that the injuries on the deceased's neck could have been caused by the belt recovered from the applicant.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the FSL report supported the prosecution's case and that the belt used in the crime had been recovered at the instance of the applicant. The court also noted that the blood samples lifted from the car used by the accused persons, which was registered in the name of the applicant, had matched with the DNA of the deceased.
Issues: Whether the applicant should be granted bail in a case of murder based on circumstantial evidence.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the applicant could not claim bail on the ground of parity since the role of the applicant and the evidence against him was different from that of the co-accused who had been granted bail. The court also noted that the applicant was facing trial for the offence of murder and several material witnesses were yet to be examined.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the bail application, but directed the trial court to ensure that the trial is concluded expeditiously.
BAIL APPLN. 2624/2023 Page 1 of 8
$~
*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%
Reserved on: 23.11.2023
Pronounced on: 22.12.2023
+
BAIL APPLN. 2624/2023
PRADEEP
..... Petitioner
Through:
Mr. Ashok Kr. Chhikara, Ms.
Shobha and Mr. Vivek Tiwari,
Advocates.
versus
THE STATE NCT OF DELHI
..... Respondent
Through:
Mr.
Amol
Sinha,
ASC
(Criminal)
alongwith
Ms.
Chavi, Mr. Kshitiz Garg, Mr.
Arjun
Singh
Kadian,
Advocates
and
Inspector
Sanjeev Kumar, PS Dwarka
North.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA
JUDGMENT
SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J.
1.
The instant application under Section 439 read with Section
482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘Cr.P.C.’) has been filed
on behalf of applicant seeking grant of regular bail in case FIR
bearing no. 152/2017 registered at Police Station Dwarka, North
Delhi, for offences punishable under Sections 302/201/34 of Indian
Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’).
2.
Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that on 25.05.2017, the
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:23.12.2023
17:21:17
Signature Not Verified
BAIL APPLN. 2624/2023 Page 2 of 8
police had received information vide DD entry no. 10A regarding an
unidentified body lying at footpath near Orissa Sadan, Sector 16B,
Dwarka. Upon reaching the spot, the police had discovered injury
marks on the neck and face of the deceased and blood stains on the
jeans worn by the deceased. However, the identity of the body could
not be ascertained. Thereafter, the present case was registered under
Section 302 of IPC. The police had then sent hue and cry notices to
the nearby police stations as well as to the neighbouring states. On
26.05.2017, the CRO Branch of the police had identified the
deceased as one Marshal, son of Sh. Raj Singh, aged about 22 years,
who had been reported as missing on 25.05.2017 at Police Station
Ranhola, Delhi. Thereafter, one Arjun had identified the deceased as
his elder brother, and he had expressed his suspicion about the
involvement of present accused/applicant in causing death of the
deceased, since the brother of deceased i.e. Arjun had good relations
with Pooja i.e. the wife of present accused/applicant. During the
course of investigation, the police had obtained the Call Detail
Records of the applicant and it had been revealed that the mobile
location of the applicant was in the area of P.S. Dwarka as well as in
the area where the body of the deceased had been found. In the
meanwhile, the post-mortem report of the deceased had revealed that
there were several injuries on his neck, eyes and lips, and the injury
on the neck i.e. “transverse ligature mark 10 cm in the form of
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:23.12.2023
17:21:17
Signature Not Verified
BAIL APPLN. 2624/2023 Page 3 of 8
was 2.5 cm” was opined as the cause of death by the doctors
concerned. As per prosecution, the applicant had disclosed during
investigation that on 24.05.2017, he and his brother Deepak had gone
to Transport Authority, Sector-10, Dwarka to enquire about their
license and that they had been drinking since the morning. He had
further disclosed that in the evening, he alongwith his brother Deepak
and his friend Ravi had picked up the deceased from near his
residence and while drinking and roaming in the car, they had
continued to slap and beat the deceased. On seeing this behaviour, his
friend Ravi had got down from the car near Najafgarh road.
However, the applicant and his brother/co-accused had then taken the
deceased to Gurgaon and on their way from Gurgaon to Delhi, they
had killed the deceased by using a belt and had thrown him
somew
