(1.) The petitioner, who is facing trial for offence under Sections 302/201/120-B of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as "Indian Penal Code") and Section 27 of the Arm Act in the case., commonly known as "Jessica Lal Murder Case' prays for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the "Code"' only).
(2.) The prosecution case, briefly stated, is that on the intervening night of 29/4/1999 30/4/1999, a party was going on at Tamrind Cafe, Qutub Colonade, Mehrauli, New Delhi, which was owned by one Mrs.Bina Ramani. The petitioner along with his friends Vikas Yadav, Amardeep Singh @ Toni Gill, Alok Khanna and Amit Jhingan reached that Cafe at about 11.00 p.m. Jessica Lal-deceased, a model, was working at the Cafe as a Bar-maid. Towards the midnight when the party had almost come to an end, the petitioner started insisting for some more drinks, He first had a tiff with Public Witness. Malini Ramani, daughter of the owner of the Cafe, and thereafter asked Jessica Lal deceased to give him some more drinks. On her refusal, he allegedly took out a pistol and fired one shot towards the roof and the other towards' her,which hit her temple resulting in her death. The petitioner and his co-accused escaped from the Cafe but were later arrested. After investigations they were challaned and sent up for trial.
(3.) I have heard Shri R.S.Cheema, Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Shri S.K.Saxena, Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that all the three alleged eye-witnesses have been examined in the Trial Court as Public Witnesss.2, 3 and 4, but none has supported the prosecution case to say that the accused petitioner had fired at deceased Jessica Lal and committed her murder. According to him, mere presence of the petitioner and the spot is of no consequence as so many others were also present there and as such, there are no grounds on record to suggest even that the petitioner was concerned or connected with the murder of Jessica Lal. He submits that the police had falsely introduced the aforesaid three eye-witnesses the case, which is full of holes from day one inasmuch according to CFSL report on record, two cartridges recover from the spot were fired from two different fire am According to him it shows that the assailant was not one by two. He also contends that statements of Public Witnesss. Shiv Daas and Karan Rajput, under 'Section 161 of the Code, were record after about one month of the incident, which strengthens stance of the hostile witnesses that they were not at witnesses to the occurrence and had been falsely put up support of the case of the prosecution. It is submitted to there is no other evidence with the prosecution to connect petitioner with the crime and as such, he deserves to enlarged on bail. It is prayed that the petitioner, who young man, having no antecedents of crime, may be enlarge bail during pendency of trial on suitable terms conditions. It is pointed out that he is already in cus for the last about,two years and three months.