Full Text
Translation output
$—21 to 24&29(common order)
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
BAIL APPLN.No.2368/2018 BAIL APPLN.No.2370/2018
BAIL APPLN.No.2371/2018 BAIL APPLN.No.2374/2018
BAIL APPLN.No.2382/2018 CHINTU@DURGESH KUMAR Petitioner
DEVENDER Petitioner KINNA@KRISHNA Petitioner DEVENDER Petitioner
LOKESH Petitioner
Through: Mr.Vijay Kinger with Ms.Roopa Nagpal,Advocates.
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
BAIL APPLN.No.2368/2018 BAIL APPLN.No.2370/2018
BAIL APPLN.No.2371/2018 BAIL APPLN.No.2374/2018
BAIL APPLN.No.2382/2018 CHINTU@DURGESH KUMAR Petitioner
DEVENDER Petitioner KINNA@KRISHNA Petitioner DEVENDER Petitioner
LOKESH Petitioner
Through: Mr.Vijay Kinger with Ms.Roopa Nagpal,Advocates.
VERSUS
STATE Respondent
Through: Mr.Ravi Nayak,APP for State with Insp.Tanvir Ashraf,DIU/NE Distt.
Mr.Niraj Jha,Adv.for complainant.
Through: Mr.Ravi Nayak,APP for State with Insp.Tanvir Ashraf,DIU/NE Distt.
Mr.Niraj Jha,Adv.for complainant.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA
09.10.2018 The status report has been filed which has been placed on the file on bail application No. 2368/2018 which may be read as part ofthe record of the other connected bail applications arising out ofFIR no.301/2018,police station Gokulpuri involving offences punishable under Sections 365/304/34
IPG.
There is ample evidence showing that the petitioners had taken the deceased Rahul along presumablyto go for a bath in the river Gang Nahar in
BAIL APPLN.No.2368/2018& connec. Matters Page I of2
2018:DHC:8438 the area of Murad Nagar, U.P., they having left the house ofthe deceased sometime around 11.30 am on 26.05.2018. It is stated that the petitioners returned on the same evening without Rahul, the deceased, his father (the first informant of the case) being called and informed some time in the evening that Rahul had gone missing. The father accompanied the petitioners to the area in question leaving Delhi around 7.30 P.M. on
26.05.2018. It is during the efforts made there that the dead body of the
Rahul was found in the river on 28.05.2018. In the autopsy report ante mortem injuries have been noted including in the skull region,such injuries having been opined as the cause ofdeath. It is againstthis backdrop thatthe first informant suspects the involvement ofthe petitioners in the offence of culpable homicide of his son. The petitioners, concededly, did not lodge any report with any authority after Rahul had gone missing. Their oral version that they had made all endeavour at Gang Nahar Murad Nagar to trace out Rahul and that they had returned only at 2.00 am on 27.05.2018 is in sharp contrastto the case ofthe firstinformantin the FIR.
^ Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the submission of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor that custodial interrogation might be required cannot be brushed aside. No good grounds to admitthe petitioners on anticipatory bail is made out.
The bail applications are dismissed.
"«K.GAUBi OCTOBER 09,2018 srh BAIL APPLN.No.2368/2018& connec. Matters Page2of2
2018:DHC:8438
09.10.2018 The status report has been filed which has been placed on the file on bail application No. 2368/2018 which may be read as part ofthe record of the other connected bail applications arising out ofFIR no.301/2018,police station Gokulpuri involving offences punishable under Sections 365/304/34
IPG.
There is ample evidence showing that the petitioners had taken the deceased Rahul along presumablyto go for a bath in the river Gang Nahar in
BAIL APPLN.No.2368/2018& connec. Matters Page I of2
2018:DHC:8438 the area of Murad Nagar, U.P., they having left the house ofthe deceased sometime around 11.30 am on 26.05.2018. It is stated that the petitioners returned on the same evening without Rahul, the deceased, his father (the first informant of the case) being called and informed some time in the evening that Rahul had gone missing. The father accompanied the petitioners to the area in question leaving Delhi around 7.30 P.M. on
26.05.2018. It is during the efforts made there that the dead body of the
Rahul was found in the river on 28.05.2018. In the autopsy report ante mortem injuries have been noted including in the skull region,such injuries having been opined as the cause ofdeath. It is againstthis backdrop thatthe first informant suspects the involvement ofthe petitioners in the offence of culpable homicide of his son. The petitioners, concededly, did not lodge any report with any authority after Rahul had gone missing. Their oral version that they had made all endeavour at Gang Nahar Murad Nagar to trace out Rahul and that they had returned only at 2.00 am on 27.05.2018 is in sharp contrastto the case ofthe firstinformantin the FIR.
^ Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the submission of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor that custodial interrogation might be required cannot be brushed aside. No good grounds to admitthe petitioners on anticipatory bail is made out.
The bail applications are dismissed.
"«K.GAUBi OCTOBER 09,2018 srh BAIL APPLN.No.2368/2018& connec. Matters Page2of2
2018:DHC:8438
JUDGMENT