LAWS(DLH)-2011-2-257

SHEELA Vs. STATE

Decided On February 17, 2011
SHEELA Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition is filed by the Petitioner under Section 439 of the Cr.PC praying inter alia for grant of bail in FIR No. 400/2009 lodged under Sections 302 / 34 IPC, registered with Police Station: Prashant Vihar, New Delhi. The complainant herein is the brother of the deceased.

(2.) Counsel for the Petitioner refers to the order of this Court granting bail to a co-accused on 14.02.2011, in Bail Appln. No. 16/2011 and prays that bail be granted to the Petitioner on the ground of parity. A Status Report was called for from the State. The same has been filed. As per the Status Report, the undisputed facts of the case are that the deceased Sh. Virender Singh was residing at Rohini along with his family members and ran a printing press. He had a relationship with the Petitioner, who was stated to be in the habit of frequently taking money from the deceased. The complainant was opposed to his brother's relationship with the Petitioner. On the date of the crime, i.e., on 27.1.2009, when the deceased did not return home till late night, as per the complainant, he rushed to the residence of the Petitioner at 1 AM only to find the body of his brother lying in front of House No. 5/33, Block E-1, Sector-15, Rohini. In the complaint, it was alleged that the Petitioner and one Yogesh Dagar were holding the legs of the deceased and the other accused persons were assaulting him with fists and kicks at the instigation of the Petitioner. Thereafter, when a car reached the spot, the complainant ran to his house to call his brothers and when he returned at the place of occurrence, he found that the deceased had been removed to a hospital by the police, where he was declared as brought dead. Apart from the Petitioner, Yogesh Dagar, Jitender Soni and Sushila Chaudhary were also arrested in the case and charges were framed against them.

(3.) Learned APP for the State submits that the charge sheet was filed and charges have been framed and out of the twenty witnesses listed by the prosecution, five public witnesses have already been examined, thus leaving the remaining formal witnesses, including medical witnesses and police officials still to be examined.