Delhi High Court
Babu Lal vs The State Govt Of Nct Delhi on 1 July, 2015
Author: Suresh Kait
$~3
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Judgment delivered on: 1st July, 2015
+ BAIL APPLN. 1068/2015
BABU LAL ..... Petitioner
Represented by: Mr. Suraj Prakash
Sharma, Adv.
versus
THE STATE GOVT OF NCT DELHI ..... Respondent
Represented by: Mr. Ravi Nayak, APP for
State with ASI Ram Avtar, PS-Begumpur.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)
1. Vide the present petition, petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in
case FIR No. 470/2015, registered at PS-Begumpur for the offences
punishable under Sections 308/341/34 IPC.
2. The case of the prosecution is that complainant Mohit, who
was working as a helper at Shop of Dacart at Sector-20, Rohini,
Delhi and the petitioner and Umrao Singh, who are brothers,
residing at B-4 Block at the other side of the road had a quarrel
around two years back and the matter was compromised later on.
But since then, some hot arguments used to take place between
them.
3. On 30.04.2015, when the sister-in-law of Mohit, namely
Monika and his sister Priyanka were on the first floor of their
house, at the same time, Ms. Santra, wife of Umrao Singh, started
abusing his sister and sister-in-law from the front side of the roof
itself. His sister-in-law told him about this. On hearing this, he
went to their house at about 11.15 PM to make her understood.
Then Santra and Umrao Singh came down and started abusing and
beating him with fists and blows. He tried to escape himself from
their clutches, but the aforesaid persons again restrained him and
petitioner Babu Lal hit the bricks upon the complainant Mohit from
the second floor of the house, due to which blood started oozing out
of his head.
4. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits
that allegations of fists and blows are against Santra and Umrao
Singh. However the allegations against the petitioner is that he
threw bricks upon the complainant Mohit.
5. As per the MLC report, the injury on Mohit is simple,
however, the dental injury is grievous. Therefore, the grievous
injury is due to the fists and blows of Santra and Umrao Singh and
not due to the throwing of bricks of petitioner Babu Lal, which had
hit the head of Mr. Mohit and that injury is simple.
6. Ld. Counsel further submits that the aforesaid two accused
namely, Santra and Umrao Singh have already been released on
anticipatory bail by the Trial Court and this Court respectively.
7. Ld. Counsel submits that since the role of the petitioner is
similar to the other two accused, therefore, on parity he is entitled
for anticipatory bail.
8. On the other hand, ld. APP for the State submits that
petitioner had thrown a brick from the second floor, which had hit
the head of the complainant Mohit. Though the injuries are simple
but that could have been fatal. Therefore, the present petition may
be dismissed.
9. Ld. APP has taken instructions from the IO, who has
confirmed that as per MLC, head injury is simple, whereas the
dental injury is grievous.
10. I note, pursuant to order dated 29.05.2015, the petitioner has
joined the investigation and is no more required for custodial
interrogation.
11. Therefore, keeping in view the fact that co-accused named
above have already been granted anticipatory bail, I am of the
considered opinion, the petitioner is also entitled for anticipatory
bail.
12. In view of above, petitioner shall be released on bail in the
event of arrest in terms of order dated 29.05.2015 passed by this
Court.
13. Dasti.
SURESH KAIT, J
JULY 01, 2015
jg
