SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

HIGH COURT OF DELHI
RAVI KUMAR @ AMIT – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE (NCT) OF DELHI – Respondent
BAIL APPLN.-2386/2021



BAIL APPLN. 2386/2021

Page 1 of 18

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Date of decision: 01st FEBRUARY, 2022

IN THE MATTER OF:

+

BAIL APPLN. 2386/2021

RAVI KUMAR @ AMIT

..... Petitioner

Through

Mr. Sanjiv Dagar, Mr. Yogesh

Verma, Advocates

versus

THE STATE (NCT) OF DELHI

..... Respondent

Through

Mr. Amit Prasad, SPP

for the State with Mr. Ayodhya

Prasad, Advocate and SI Santosh

Gupta, Crime Branch

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD

SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J.

1.

The petitioner seeks bail in FIR No. 70/2020 dated 27.02.2020

registered at PS Bhajanpura for offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302,

307, 396, 436, 455, 201, 188, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860

2.

The FIR relates to the violence that took place in the National Capital

Territory of Delhi in the month of February 2020.

3.

The brief facts leading to the instant Bail Application are that on

25.02.2020, around 11:00 AM., the complainant had gone to purchase milk

from a nearby shop when he received a call from his son Asif informing him

that a huge crowd of around 100 people had gathered near their house in

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/000371

BAIL APPLN. 2386/2021

Page 2 of 18

support of NRC and CAA. The crowd was chanting slogans of “Jai Shree

Ram”. The crowd, thereafter, entered their house after breaking open the

locks, and set it on fire. It is stated that the complainant’s family members

and employees rushed to the top floor of the house. The complainant’s

family members and workers were safely rescued from the roof of his

residence, which was made possible by the rescue operation launched by the

police in support with the locals of the vicinity.

4.

It is stated that the complainant’s mother, Smt. Akbari, who was 85

years old could not reach the rooftop due to her age. After extinguishing the

fire, her body was found lying on a folding bed and was recovered from the

second floor. She was taken to Guru Teg Bahadur Hospital, where she was

declared brought dead vide MLC No. D-45. A Post Mortem was conducted

at GTB Hospital itself and vide PM Report No. 345/2020 dated 28.02.2020,

the cause of death was opined as Asphyxia as a result of an ante-mortem

inhalation of smoke. It is further stated that the crowd looted Rs. 8,00,000 in

cash and a box containing gold and silver jewellery and other valuable

articles from their residence

5.

It is stated that the investigation of the said case was transferred from

North East to Special Investigation Team-II, Crime Branch, Delhi and

subsequently to Special Investigation Unit-I, Crime Branch, Delhi vide order

No.

8266-74/AC-III/C&T/PHQ

dated

27.02.2020

and

No.

216/S)/DCP/Crime (SIU & ISC) dated 04.03.2020. The investigation was

undertaken by Insp. Pankaj Arora.

6.

It is stated that the petitioner was arrested on 30.03.2020 and has been

in custody since then. The chargesheet was filed on 07.06.2020 and on

06.04.2021 the charges were framed by the Trial Court.

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/000371

BAIL APPLN. 2386/2021

Page 3 of 18

7.

The petitioner had filed Bail Application No. 398/2020 before the

Court of Sessions Judge which was dismissed vide order dated 06.08.2020.

Thereafter, another bail application vide IA No. 05/2021 in SC No. 17/2021

was filed before the Court of Sessions Judge which was subsequently

dismissed vide order dated 24.06.2021.

8.

Mr. Sanjiv Dagar, the learned counsel for the petitioner, contended

that the accused has been falsely implicated in the present matter and that

there exists no evidence which can prove the connection of the Petitioner to

the incident beyond reasonable doubt. He submitted that the FIR was

registered on 27.02.2020, that is, two days after the incident occurred and

the name of the accused is nowhere mentioned therein. He further submitted

that the accused was not even called for investigation and was directly

arrested. Furt

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top