PRABHAT GUPTA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The case appears to be based on a dying declaration of the deceased made before the Head Constable Prabhakaran and Constable Prakash Chand. According to the prosecution case case Head. Constable Prabhakaran was informed by the deceased that since he had given some secret information to .he police against the assailants Vishal, Mahesh Chand and Deepak alongwith their coopanion Sunny and others with an intention to kill the deiceased caused knife injuries to the deceased. According to Head Constable Prabhakaran he saw 7 or 8 boys immediately standing thereafter near House No. F-232, Daxinpuri, Delhi and when he rushed towards them to catch hold of them ,all of them ran away. Sunny was seen by Head Constable Prabhakaran in 7 or 8 boys and was identified by Head Constable Prabhakaran subsequently. It is also submitted that the accused has been absconded.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no evidence to connect the petitioner with the offence as there were several persons by the name of Sunny in Delhi. The petitioner was not known by name of Sunny. The petitioner was known as Sunny when he was just a child of one year or so and not thereafter. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that there is variation in the statements of Head Constable and the Constable. However, learned counsel for the petitioner could not give any reason as to why Head Constable Prabhakaran and the other Constable Prakash Chand have stated against the petitioner.

(3.) Taking into consideration overall facts and circumstances one feels that it is not a fit case to grant bail. The petition is dismissed.