AMIT SINGH BHANDARI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present application under Sec. 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ('CrPC') seeks regular bail in case FIR No. 409/2015, under Ss. 302/397/411/120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('IPC'), registered at PS. Kapashera, Delhi.

(2.) It is the case of the prosecution that on 22/9/2015, a PCR call was received vide DD Entry No. 18A and 19A and acting on it, the concerned police personnel reached H.No. 154/3, Dundahera Road, Bijwasan, Delhi. They were apprised that a lady namely, Bimla Devi, had been taken to Columbia Asia Hospital by her son. Upon reaching Columbia Asia Hospital, the police was informed that the aforesaid lady was declared brought dead. Thereafter, statement of complainant, Sh. Gaurav Bhardwaj, i.e., son of the deceased, was recorded and present FIR was registered under Sec. 302 of the IPC at PS. Kapashera. It is the case of the prosecution that during the course of further investigation, on 12/10/2015 Crime Branch South, P.S. R.K. Puram gave information regarding the arrest of the present applicant. It is further the case of the prosecution that the present applicant, on further interrogation disclosed that he was residing at H.No. 154/3, Dundahera Road, Bijwasan, Delhi and had to pay 3 months' rent of Rs.20,000.00 to the landlord/owner Sh. Shiv Ganesh Bhardwaj, husband of the deceased. He further disclosed that the deceased used to pester him to pay the rent and since he was unable to pay the same, he contacted his friend Ashwani from Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh and informed that the landlady had a lot of money and gold and it can be looted after committing the murder. It was further disclosed that they, in turn involved two other associates, namely, Chhuttan and Ajju in the said conspiracy. In pursuance of the aforesaid conspiracy, it was disclosed that on 22/9/2015, they looted the home of the deceased after committing her murder. It is the case of the prosecution that at the instance of the present applicant, the aforesaid co-accused persons, namely, Ashwani Kushwah, Vijay Kumar Kushwaha @ Chhuttan and Ajay Kumar Patel @ Ajju were arrested and the looted articles were recovered from their possession/at their instance. It is further the case of the prosecution that one witness, namely, Nitin Khandelwal identified the co-accused persons, namely, Vijay Kumar Kushwaha and Ashwani Kushwah as the persons who were seen coming out from the gate of house of the deceased on 22/9/2015. It is also the case of the prosecution that mobile phone belonging to the deceased was recovered at the instance of the applicant.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant submitted that the present applicant has been in judicial custody for the last 5 years. It was submitted that the case of the prosecution is circumstantial in nature and there are no eye-witnesses to the incident. It was further submitted that the present applicant had been granted interim bail on the grounds of the HPC Guidelines, and he surrendered in time, without misusing the liberty granted to him. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant further submitted that the case of the prosecution against the present applicant is only based on disclosure statements. It was pointed out that nothing has been placed on record to demonstrate that the present applicant was a tenant of the deceased's husband. It was further submitted that the recovery of the mobile phone at the instance of the present applicant also cannot be relied upon as the IMEI numbers are different. It was also submitted that no evidence has been placed on record to show that the phone recovered at the instance of the present applicant belonged to the deceased.