$~34

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%

+

BAIL APPLN. 4289/2021

ANIS @ DUPETTEWALA

..... Petitioner

Through:

Mr. Sulaiman Mohd. Khan & Ms.

Taiba Khan, Advs.

versus

THE STATE ( GOVT. OF NCT, DELHI)

..... Respondent

Through:

Ms. Neelam Sharma, APP with SI

Deepak, PS Kamla Market.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TALWANT SINGH

TALWANT SINGH, J.

1. The petitioner/applicant has moved this regular bail application in FIR

No. 20/2015 under Section 302/396/412//34 IPC and 25/27 Arms Act

registered at PS Kamla Market. His earlier bail application was dismissed by

the learned Trial Court on 04.10.2021.

2. The case of the prosecution, as narrated by the petitioner/applicant, is

that on 11.01.2015, Constable Mukesh had given the information to the Police

Station that a young boy was found in an injured condition, who was shifted

to hospital. The said injured was declared as ‘brought dead’ on his arrival at

the hospital.

2.1.

The present FIR was registered under Section 302 IPC. The deceased

was later on identified as Rehman Usmani. During investigation, the present

petitioner/applicant along with other persons, was arrested and charge sheet

was filed under Section 302/396/412/34 IPC and 25/27 Arms Act. The said

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/001853

case is a pending adjudication before the learned ASJ, Tis Hazari Court. The

co-accused, Tehsin was released on regular bail by this Court vide order dated

25.09.2020. The other co-accused, namely, Arshad, Adil and Nadeem, were

released on bail by the learned Trial Court.

2.2

The present petitioner/applicant is stated to be in custody since

18.01.2015. He has prayed for regular bail on the grounds that the order of

dismissal of his bail was passed ignoring the facts of the case; all the material

witnesses have been already examined by the prosecution and there is no

chance of tampering with the evidence; other co-accused have been already

granted bail by this Court as well as by the learned Trial Court and the role

assigned to the petitioner/applicant is less serious than the other persons, who

are on regular bail.

2.3

It is further stated that the bail application of the present

petitioner/applicant was dismissed only on the ground that he was involved in

four other cases; however, out of the four cases, the petitioner/applicant was

convicted in FIR No. 134/2012 and he was sentenced for a period of four

months in 2017, which he has already completed; he was already acquitted in

FIR No. 219/2014; in other two cases, he was sentenced to the period already

undergone; hence, this ground of pendency of other four cases against him

was not available to the learned Trial Court for dismissing his bail application.

3. Notice was issued. Status report and additional status report were filed.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner/applicant as well as the

learned APP for State.

5. The bail application of the present petitioner/applicant has been

opposed on the ground that there is sufficient incriminating evidence against

the petitioner/applicant. He and his associates brutally murdered the

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/001853

complainant by inflicting 7 injuries by sharp edged weapon with common

intention. The accused is a member of a gang and was involved in serious

offences previously. He is a habitual criminal, having four previous criminal

involvements including three cases of NDPS Act, wherein he has been

convicted. ATM card of the deceased was recovered from his possession, eye-

witness PW Himal deposed against him and PW Ujjaif alias Ajju has also

clearly mentioned his name in his statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and

his Chief examination was being conducted.

5.1

The bail application was adjourned from time to time. Later on it is

reported that evidence of the said main witness, namely, Ujjaif alias Ajju has

been r