ARBIND KUMAR Vs. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As per prosecution, petitioner along with co-accused Birmati, Neelam, Naveen and Ashok hatched a conspiracy and pursuant thereof, deceased was shot dead by Ashok. One Satpal had heard the accused persons conspiring with each other to kill the deceased.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that co-accused Birmati and Neelam have already been admitted to bail by this Court. Role of the petitioner is no different than these two co-accused. As per prosecution, Satpal heard the petitioner conspiring with co-accused Birmati, Neelam and Ashok to kill the deceased. Conspiracy was hatched at the house of Birmati and Satpal heard their conversation as the door of the room was open. As per learned counsel, this version of Satpal was improbable as no prudent person would hatch conspiracy in open.

(3.) Learned counsel further contends that while granting bail to co-accused Neelam, this Court observed that conspiracies are hatched in the secrecy of darkness and not in the manner as disclosed by Satapl to the Police.