Tarun Bhalla vs The State (Nct Of Delhi)
2009 Latest Caselaw 3977 Del

*              IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                    BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1733/2009

                                       Reserved on : 16.09.2009
                                   Date of Decision : 25.09.2009

Tarun Bhalla                                    ......Petitioner
                               Through:   Mr.     Arun   Shrma,
                                          Advocate.

                               Versus

The State (NCT of Delhi)                   ...... Respondent
                               Through:   Mr. Pawan Bahl, APP

CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALI

1.     Whether Reporters of local papers may be
       allowed to see the judgment?                            NO
2.     To be referred to the Reporter or not ?                 NO
3.     Whether the judgment should be reported
       in the Digest ?                                         NO

V.K. SHALI, J.

1. This is an application for grant of interim bail to the

petitioner.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

have also gone through the record.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has prayed for

interim bail for a period of 60 days from the date of release

on the ground that the petitioner has old parents. His

father is stated to be diabetic apart from being heart

patient. It is stated that the petitioner has one son and one

daughter both of whom are very young. The daughter is

stated to be just three years old and is stated to be

suffering from Neuro related disease. It is stated that she

falls unconscious with muscular stiffen, jerk and twitch

with tongue bitten for a couple of minute and drift into a

deep slip. It is stated that she is undergoing treatment at

Govind Pant Hospital where number of tests have been

conducted and since there is no other male member in the

family and therefore, interim bail for a period of 60 days is

prayed.

4. The allegations against the petitioner are that he along with

the two of his co-accused persons had wrongly confined

and beaten the deceased Sajauddin who was called by

them to their office. Sajauddin was actually acting as a

recovery agent on behalf of a collection agency for HSBC

Bank. It is alleged that the deceased was beaten by these

accused persons including the petitioner in a most brutal

and merciless manner because of which not only a

confession regarding misappropriation of money was

extracted from him and then he was thrown from third floor

of a building but as a consequence of which he died.

Evidence in the form of CD was recorded which gave the

full details of the incident which has been seized by the

police from the Star News. On account of the death of the

deceased the FIR No. 132/2008 which was originally for an

offence of 323 IPC was converted into 302 IPC. The charge

sheet has been filed against the petitioner the allegations

against the petitioner are very serious in nature inasmuch

as they are of having caused culpable homicide not

amounting to murder.

5. So far as the ground for grant of interim bail is concerned, I

do not feel that these are grounds on the basis of which the

discretion deserves to be exercised in his favour because

the allegations are very serious in nature of having caused

the death of a person. I am, therefore, not inclined to

exercise the said discretion in favour of the petitioner and

accordingly the application for grant of bail is dismissed.

V.K. SHALI, J.

SEPTEMBER 25, 2009 KP