Delhi High Court
Rajesh vs State on 22 January, 2016
#56
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 22.01.2016
BAIL APPLN. 153/2016
RAJESH ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Amit Rao, Advocate
versus
STATE ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. M.S. Oberoi, APP with SI Prem
Kumar, PS- Sangam Vihar
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J (ORAL)
1. The present is an application under Section 438 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) seeking pre-arrest bail in FIR
No.702/2015, under Section 307/34 IPC, registered at Police Station-
Sangam Vihar.
2. Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant would firstly urge that
the subject FIR has been registered as a consequence of a dispute between
brothers and is, consequently, a family matter, which can be amicably
resolved with the intervention of the applicant's mother and sister. Counsel
appearing on behalf of the applicant would secondly urge that the applicant
and his wife also suffered injuries as a consequence of the altercation
between the brothers. It is lastly urged by counsel appearing on behalf of the
applicant that the injuries suffered by the complainant are self-inflicted.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the applicant attacked his brother
with a knife on vital parts of his body and, consequently, committed an
offence under Section 307 of the IPC.
4. I have perused the Medico-Legal Report authored by Dr. Bhawna of
Batra Hospital & Medical Research Centre dated 08.11.2015 which reveals
that the injuries inflicted on the complainant by the applicant herein were
dangerous and a knife was used to cause those injuries.
5. The submission made on behalf of the applicant to the effect that the
present is a family matter and can be amicably resolved, does not come to
the aid of the applicant, inasmuch as, some of the injuries inflicted on the
complainant are on the vital parts of his body and are the consequence of a
long pending property dispute between the brothers. In this behalf, it is also
observed that the applicant and the complainant reside in the same house on
different floors and, therefore, there is a distinct possibility of a recurrence of
violence. It is also noticed that the injuries have been described as
dangerous and were evidently caused by a knife. Inter alia, the complainant
had received a lacerated wound near his nose expanded up to his upper-lip.
6. Prima facie, an offence under Section 307 IPC is made out
particularly, in view of the circumstance that the injuries have been opined as
'dangerous'. The other submission made on behalf of the applicant to the
effect that the injuries were self-inflicted, does not hold any water, inasmuch
as, from the material on record, the occurrence of the incident cannot be
doubted at this stage. The submission of the applicant that injuries were
suffered by him and his wife at the time of altercation, are ample testimony
to its occurrence and their presence at the spot when the offence was
allegedly committed.
7. In the present case, the allegations against the applicant are grave and
the material on record prima facie points to his guilt in the commission of an
offence under Section 307 IPC. It is observed that the Medico-Legal Report
states that the injuries to the complainant were caused with a knife and were
dangerous in nature. Furthermore, the investigation is at an initial stage and
the weapon of offence used for the commission of the crime is yet to be
recovered. Custodial interrogation of the applicant is, therefore, necessary.
8. The application is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed.
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J
JANUARY 22, 2016
dn
