Mehtab Ali @ Gupta vs State
2012 Latest Caselaw 2858 Del

*             HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                  BAIL APPL. No.1340/2011

                                            Date of Decision : 01.05.2012

MEHTAB ALI @ GUPTA                                          ...... Petitioner
                                      Through:      Mr. Haneef Mohd. &
                                                    Mr. Anil Vyas, Advs.

                                        Versus

STATE                                                ......      Respondent
                                      Through:      Mr. Sunil Sharma, APP


                                            WITH

BAIL APPL. NO.1795/2011

MOHD. IRFAN KHAN @ SONU                                    ...... Petitioner
                      Through:                      Mr. Biswaji Swain &
                                                    Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advs.

                                        Versus

STATE                                                ......      Respondent
                        Through:                    Mr. Sunil Sharma, APP
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALI

V.K. SHALI, J. (Oral)

1. These are two bail applications filed by Mehtab Ali and Mohd.

Irfan Khan.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners

separately.

3. The arguments, which have been advanced by both the

counsel, though separately, are almost on the same lines. It

has been contended by them that the evidence, which has

been recorded against the petitioners till date, does not show

their involvement in the commission of the offence. It has also

been contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that

the co-accused, on the basis of similar evidence, has also

been released on bail and, therefore, the present petitioners

be also extended the said benefit of bail.

4. The learned APP has vehemently opposed the application for

the grant of bail and has contended that there is ample

evidence which has been brought on record by the

Prosecuting Agency against the petitioners. It has also been

contended by him that at the stage of the grant of bail, this

Court is not required to go into the minute dissection of the

evidence adduced by the Prosecution.

5. I have carefully considered the submissions made by the

respective sides.

6. Briefly stated, the case of the Prosecution against the

petitioners is thus:-

That on 29.11.2010, Shri Paramjit Singh, s/o Kulwant Singh,

M/s. Akal Transport Company, A-4A, Vishwakarma Colony,

Tugalkabad, New Delhi had made a written complaint

addressed to SHO/Pul Prahladpur, New Delhi that on

27.11.2010, at 9:00 P.M. his driver, Suraj, s/o Keshav, r/o

Village Fetul Pur, Distt. Gazipur (UP) took his truck No. HR

37 B 5209 with container No.CAXU 2877327-20 loaded with

plastic dana for Mayapuri, Delhi, but he could not reach the

destination. Driver Suraj was having Mobile No.9910838446,

but on dialing his phone, it was found switched off. His house

telephone No. was 07897684341, but the same was also

found switched off. The container was to be delivered at M/s.

Doshi Plastic Industries, Mansarover Garden, Mayapuri, New

Delhi, but the same did not reach there also. The above

complaint was marked to SI Mahender Singh for necessary

action. Subsequently, on 30.11.2010, the above case was got

registered by SI Mahender Singh u/s 407 IPC against driver

Suraj and investigation was carried out.

7. During investigation on 4.12.2010, SI Mahender Singh

received a letter No.8699/AC-III-Addl. CP/SED dated

4.12.2010 with inquest papers of driver Suraj from PS:Sadar

Sonepat (Haryana) that on 1.12.2010, the truck No. HR 37

B5209 was found abandoned at Sector-7 road, Sonepat and

the dead body of driver Suraj was found in the cabin of the

truck behind the driver seat with the rope tied around the

neck of the dead body. The dead body and the truck were got

photographed and got inspected by FSL team, Madhuban and

FPB team, Sonepat; no chance prints were found. The dead

body was identified by Shri Paramjeet Singh, the truck owner

and the employer of driver Suraj and his uncle Sunil, s/o Nand

Ram. The truck with 33 begs plastic dana was seized by IO,

ASI Dharambir Singh, PS:Sadar, Sonepat. The dead body of

Suraj was sent for postmortem at Civil Hospital, Sonepat.

The papers pertaining to plastic dana were attached with

inquest papers. On 2.12.2010, postmortem of the dead body

was got conducted by the IO at PGIMS, Rohtak, where Shri

Keshav, father of the deceased, also identified the dead body.

The cause of death was opined as strangulation coupled with

smothering. However, viscera has been preserved for

chemical analysis for detection of any poisonous

substance/stupefying agent, if any. The offence was changed

to u/s 392/302/201/411/34 IPC.

8. On 6.12.2010, the further investigation of the case was

marked to Inspector Desh Raj Yadav. On the same day, an

information was received from SI:Sanjay Neolia, ARC, Crime

Branch, Nehru Place, vide DD No.12-B, dated 6.12.2010, that

the petitioner, Mehatab Ali @ Gupta, s/o Kayam Ali and Irfan,

s/o Bhure Khan had been arrested vide DD No. 10 u/s

41.1(d)/102 Cr.PC dated 5.12.2010, Crime Branch, Delhi.

Both the above mentioned accused had disclosed the

commission of this crime and the petitioner, Mehtab @ Gupta,

along with co-accused Irfan Khan, was apprehended with

truck No. UP 17-1705 in which 350 begs of looted plastic dana

were loaded and both had gone to dispose of the same at

Narela Industrial Area.

9. Both the accused persons were arrested in this case and their

further Disclosure Statements were recorded. Their police

remand was obtained. During the PC remand, both the

accused persons have correctly identified the places where

deceased, Suraj was administered with poisonous tablets and

was murdered at Goripur Border and they unloaded the plastic

dana. Further, at the instance of the petitioner, Mehtab Ali,

other truck with 250 begs of plastic dana was also recovered

from the locality in Narela.

10. The petitioner disclosed that he, along with Kasim, had

purchased the plastic dana @ Rs. 45/- per kg. from Irfan and

Prakash. But Prakash informed him that the driver, Suraj

would not agree to sell the same. On this, he gave poisonous

tablets to Prakash after mixing it in the wine of the driver,

Suraj. The petitioner had also correctly identified the place

where Suraj was strangulated by them and the plastic begs

were reloaded in another vehicle. Identification memos were

prepared. Case property, i.e., plastic dana, truck with

container and other vehicles were got transferred from

PS:Crime Branch and deposited in Malkhana of this PS. Efforts

have also been made to arrest co-accused Prakash, but he

has not been traced so far. A Chargesheet has already been

filed in this case and the arguments are to be heard on

24.11.2011.

11. All the recovery of plastic dana and trucks have been made at

the instance of the applicant accused. He is also previously

involved in FIR No.606/2000 u/s 396/412/120-B IPC,

PS:Bagpat (UP).

12. In view of the aforesaid facts and the prima facie evidence

gathered by the police, it is not a fit case to grant bail to the

petitioners. Hence, the applications are dismissed.

V.K. SHALI, J.

MAY 01, 2012 tp