Delhi High Court
Shahjad vs The State (Govt Of Nct Of Delhi) on 31 August, 2020
$~19
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 31.08.2020
+ BAIL APPLN.1916/2020 & CRL.M.(BAIL) 7738/2020
SHAHJAD ..... Petitioner
versus
THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Dhan Mohan Mishra, Ms. Tanu B. Mishra and
Ms. Mahima Gauta, Advocates.
For the Respondent: Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APP.
CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICESANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
1. The hearing was conducted through video conferencing.
2. Petitioner seeks regular bail in FIR No.477/2019 under Sections
302/120B/34 IPC read with Section 27 of the Arms Act, Police
Station Bhajan Pura.
3. Subject FIR was registered on the statement of the duty officer,
Police Station Geeta Colony stating that he along with a head
constable had gone to apprehend an accused in FIR No.253/2019. In
police custody said accused confessed that he along with another
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:KUNAL
MAGGU
Signing Date:31.08.2020 19:51:25 BAIL APPLN.1916/2020 Page 1
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
accused had on 13.09.2019 shot one person by the name of Nazim
Hussain.
4. As per the Status Report, information was received on
14.09.2019 that one person was shot with 4-5 bullets and he had
expired. Statement of one witness was recorded and he disclosed that
the deceased was having a dispute with one Mohsin @ Vicky @
Shooter, s/o. Abdul Rashid and Nadeem, s/o. Fazil and they had
threatened the deceased. Another witness also confirmed the same.
5. The wife of the deceased also stated that when she was
returning from the market she saw a country made pistol in the hand
of Mohsin @ Vicky and Nadeem was carrying a bag and they were
trying to escape and when she reached near her house she saw that her
husband was shot with 4-5 bullets and was in an unconscious state.
6. Petitioner was arrested on 28.09.2019. As per the charge sheet
Nadeem and Mohsin were absconding and steps were on to trace their
whereabouts. During said time one head constable of Police Station
Bhajan Pura produced the petitioner before the Investigating Officer
contending that petitioner had disclosed to him that he had informed
about the whereabouts of the deceased some time before the incident
to Mohsin and Nadeem.
7. Status report further states that as per the call detail records of
the petitioner as well as Mohsin and the deceased, they were in touch
with each other before the incident.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:KUNAL
MAGGU
Signing Date:31.08.2020 19:51:25 BAIL APPLN.1916/2020 Page 2
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no
material to connect the petitioner with the subject offence. He further
submits that merely because there was call connection between the
petitioner and the co-accused and petitioner and the deceased does not
indicate as to what conversation had taken place between them. He
submits that all of them are resident of the same locality and are
known to each other.
9. He further submits that the alleged disclosure statement
amounts to a confessional statement and is inadmissible in as much as
nothing was recovered consequent to the alleged disclosure statement.
10. He further submits that the transcript of the conversation
between the petitioner and co-accused and petitioner and the deceased
has not been produced and relied upon by the prosecution and there is
no connection of the petitioner with the alleged offence.
11. Learned counsel further submits that there is no material placed
on record by the prosecution to show any meeting of minds or
conspiracy in so far as the alleged offence is concerned.
12. Without commenting on the merits of the case and keeping in
view the facts and circumstances and also the fact that petitioner has
been in custody for nearly a year and the only evidence against the
petitioner is purely circumstantial, I am of the view that petitioner has
been able to make out a case for grant of regular bail.
13. Accordingly on petitioner furnishing a bail bond in the sum of
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:KUNAL
MAGGU
Signing Date:31.08.2020 19:51:25 BAIL APPLN.1916/2020 Page 3
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
Rs.25,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of
the concerned Trial Court, petitioner shall be released on bail.
Petitioner shall not do anything which may prejudice the trial or the
prosecution witnesses. Petitioner shall surrender his passport, if any,
and if not already done so, to the Investigating Officer. Petitioner shall
not leave the National Capital Territory of Delhi without prior
intimation to the concerned Trial Court.
14. Petition is allowed in the above terms. All other applications are
consequently disposed of.
15. Copy of the Order be uploaded on the High Court website and
be also forwarded to learned counsels through email.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.
AUGUST 31, 2020
rk
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:KUNAL
MAGGU
Signing Date:31.08.2020 19:51:25 BAIL APPLN.1916/2020 Page 4
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
