Mahabir Singh And Anr. vs The State
1994 Latest Caselaw 68 Del

JUDGMENT

V.B. Bansal, J.

(1) This order will dispose of bail applications being Crl.M.(M) I of 1994 (Mahabir Singh & Sher Singh versus State). Crl.M.(M) 24 of 1994 (Shiv Kumar versus State), Crl.M.(M) 50 of 1994 (Manoj Kumar @ Pappu versus State) and Crl.M.(M) 59 of 1994 (Parmod Kumar versus State), for the offence punishable under Sections 302/325/34 Ipc in F.I.R. No.361 of 1993, recorded at police station Nand Nagari, Delhi since they arise out of the same incident and they can be disposed of together conveniently.

(2) This case relates to an incident dated 11.9.1993 in respect of the death of Vinod Kumar, aged about 14 years.Briefly stated the prosecution story has been that on 12.9.1993, at about 4.30a.m., Ramvir Sharma took his son Vinod Kumar Sharma to G.T.B. Hospital, who was examined by Dr. P.K. Malik and declared Vinod Kumar to have been brought dead. Duty Constable Sansar Singh gave information on telephone to P.S.Nand Nagari in this regard, on the basis of which, D.D. No. 20A was recorded at 4.45 a.m. and its copy was given to S.I. Jeet Singh, who along with Constable Rajinder Singh went to the hospital.

(3) S.I.JEET Singh collected the M.L.C.of Vinod Kumar and met Smt.Satyawati W/o Shri Ramvir and recorded her statement. It was,inter-alia, stated by her that she along with her family was residing at House No. A-307-E,B-Block,Ashok Nagar and that Vinod Kumar, aged about 14 years was her son.She went on to state that on 11.9.1993,at about 6.30 p.m. Sanjay along with Babli and Parmod came to her house and took away with them her son Vinod on the plea that there was a matter with regard to a theft and that enquiry was to be made from Vinod Kumar. She has further stated that at about 10p.m.Mahavir and his son Shera,Babli, Parmod and Pappu Kapre Wala brought her son Vinod to her house and while giving abuses to her, proclaimed that in case the amount of theft was not available, they would get her house sold and at that time, Pappu gave a forceful slap on the face of her son Vinod. She claimed having made a request to them to leave her son but they did not accede to her request and again took her son along with them. It was also claimed by her that at that time, her son was groaning with pain and at about 11.30 p.m.Babli and Parmod left her son Vinod at her house when he was having injuries on his person. He has also stated that she changed the clothes of her son and made him to lay on cot and at that time, her husband was not present at the house and on arrival of her husband at house at about 4 a.m., she along with her husband took Vinod to the hospital where he was declared by the doctor as "brought dead".

(4) S.I. Jeet Singh made an endorsement on the statement of Smt. Satyawati and sent the same to the police Station Nand Nagari, on the basis of which, Fir No. 361/93 was recorded. The matter was investigated and after inquest proceedings, post-mortem examination was conducted on the body of Vinod Kumar on 13.9.1993. All the accused persons, mentioned above, were arrested and are at present in judicial custody.

(5) I have heard Shri I.U. Khan, counsel for the petitioners in Cr.M.(M) 1/94 (Mahavir Singh & Another versus Slate), Cr.M.(M) 24/94 (Shiv Kumar versus State), Cr.M.(M) 59/94 (Parmod Kumar versus State); Shri K.K. Sud, counsel for the petitioner inCr.M.(M) 50/94 (Manod Kumar @ Pappu versus State); Shri H.P.Sharma, counsel for the State in Cr.M.(M) 1/94 and Cr.M.(M) 59/94; Shri R.K.Bahri, counsel for the State in Cr.M.(M) 50/94 and Shri O.P. Faizi, counsel for the State in Cr.M.(M) 24/94 and have also gone through the record.

(6) Learned counsel for the accused persons have submitted that there has not been any previous enmity between the accused persons on one side and Vinod Kumar, deceased, on the other side. They have also submitted that there has not been anything in the evidence of the prosecution to indicate that the petitioners had either the intention or knowledge that the beatings, alleged to have been given by them to the deceased, would result in his death and even the post-mortem examination report does not indicate that the injuries found on the person of Vinod Kumar, either individually or collectively were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. It has also been submitted that the petitioners have been in custody and nothing is to be recovered from them. A prayer has, therefore, been made for release of the petitioners on bail.

(7) Learned counsel for the State have, on the other hand, submitted that the accused persons had taken the law into their own hands and instead of lodging a report with the police with regard to the suspicion of Shera about the commission of theft of Rs.7,500.00 by Vinod Kumar, they, in furtherance of their common intention all of them gave beatings to Vinod Kumar from 6.30 p.m. to 10 p.m. and thereafter, again after taking him along with them, from which, the only conclusion could be that they wanted to commit the murder of Vinod Kumar. It has also been submitted that there were as many as 11 injuries with blunt object on the body of Vinod Kumar, who died without any medical aid being available. They have referred to the statements of Sunjay son of Shri Shalik Ram, Sanjay son of Shri Devi Dutt, Ishwar son of Devi Dayal and Pankaj, injured. A prayer has, therefore, been made that no case is made out for the release of the petitioners on bail and so prayed that the applications may be dismissed.

(8) I have given my due consideration to all these submissions and have also gone through the statements of the witnesses as also the M.L.C. and report of post-mortem examination on the body of Vinod Kumar. Doctor conducting the post-mortem examination has opined that the death was due to shock as a result of multiple injuries likely to be caused by blunt force and all the injuries were ante-mortem. The statements of witnesses referred to, are about the giving of beatings to Vinod Kumar as also to Pankaj,who was taken to G.T.B. Hospital on 12.9.1993 by Laxman. It is not the stage for me to express any positive opinion as to what offence would be made out against the accused persons. Suffice it to say that no weapon has been used for inflicting injuries.

(9) Keeping in view all the facts including the statements of the witnesses and the post-mortem examination report, I am of the view that a case is made for bail. As a result, the petitioners viz. Mahavir Singh, Sher Singh (a) Sheri, Shiv Kumar, Manoj Kumar @ Pappu and Parmod Kumar are ordered to be released on bail subject to their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.20,000.00 each with one surety of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the concerned court.