Delhi High Court
Anil Kumar vs State Govt Of Nct Of Delhi on 23 March, 2018
$~28
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 23.03.2018
+ BAIL APPLN. 584/2018
ANIL KUMAR ..... Petitioner
versus
STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Mr. Abhay Man Tripathi, Adv.
For the Respondent : Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Addl. PP for the State
with Inspr. Vinay Tyagi
CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT
23.03.2018
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
1. The petitioner seeks regular bail in FIR No. 64/2008 under
Section 302 registered at Police Station Karawal Nagar, Delhi.
2. The allegations made in the FIR are that the daughter of the
complainant who was aged 7 years of age had been murdered by
someone.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner
has been falsely implicated. He submits that the petitioner has been
implicated solely on the basis of theory of last scene. However, the
evidence does not support the theory of the last scene. He submits that
the brother of the deceased in his statement has stated that the
deceased was sitting on the steps of the house of the petitioner at the
time when people were celebrating Holi. It is further stated that
several people were present in and around the said area and the
deceased was talking with one Vicky. As per the statement of the
brother of the deceased, he had seen his sister walking away in a lane
towards a house under construction, from where subsequently her
body was recovered.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that nowhere has it
come in evidence that the deceased was last seen in the company of
the petitioner. He further submits that the staircase referred to by the
brother is, in fact, a staircase in the public street and not inside the
house of the petitioner. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner
was subjected to polygraphical examination and specific questions
were put to the petitioner with regard to the subject offence and the
answers were in negative. It is submitted that at the time of
polygraphic assessment, Brain Electrical Oscillation Signatures
Profiling was also conducted and the opinion of the expert is that the
version of the petitioner is truthful.
5. Without commenting on the merits of the case and perusal of
the record shows that the petitioner has made out a case for grant of
bail.
6. Accordingly, petitioner is directed to be released on bail on his
furnishing a bail bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety of
the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial court. The
petitioner shall not do anything which shall prejudice either the trial of
the prosecution witnesses. The petitioner shall not leave the country
without the permission of the trial court.
7. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
MARCH 23, 2018
'rs'
