KUNAL@BHOLA v. StateofUttarPradesh & Ors.
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFDELHIATNEWDELHI+BAILAPPLN.3999/[email protected]:versusSTATEOFNCTDELHI.....RespondentThrough: Mr.SanjeevSabharwal, APPwithMs.MansiSharma, Adv.CORAM:HON'BLEMR.JUSTICEJASMEETSINGHORDER%04.03.2025CRL.M.A.33006/20241.Exemptionallowed, subjecttoallsuchexceptions. 2. Theapplicationisdisposedof.BAILAPPLN.3999/20243.Thisisapetitionfiledundersection483ofBNSSseekinggrantofregularbailtothepetitionerinFIRNo.843/2016,dated29.11.2016,registeredatPSNebSaraiundersections365ofIPC,1860.4.Inthepresentcase, thepetitionerhasbeenincustodysince21.03.2017andthechargesheethasbeenfiledundersections302/365/201/120B/34ofIPC,1860.5.Brieflystatingthefactsarethaton28.11.2016,thecomplainanti.e.Smt. SantraDeviregisteredacomplaintregardinghermissingson, namely, Hemraj. On29.11.2016,thecomplainantsuspectedthathersonmighthavebeenkidnapped. HencetheFIRcametoberegisteredundersection365ofIPC,1960.Subsequently, duringinvestigationoneperson, namely, [email protected], RahulKhan@Dawooddisclosedthathealongwiththepetitionerhadcalled This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/07/2025 at 00:30:35 Hemrajonfalsepretextandthereafterhaddemandedransomfromhisfatherbutaftersometime, theymurderedHemrajbyshootinghimandburiedhisdeadbodyintheareaofSangamVihar. ThedeadbodyofthedeceasedcametobediscoveredattheinstanceofRahulKhan@Dawood. Hencethepresentpetitionerwasarrestedon21.03.2017.6.Inthepresentcase, thepetitionerhadabscondedduringinvestigationandhadevadedhisarrestfollowingwhichhewasdeclaredproclaimedoffenderbyLearnedMetropolitanMagistrateon27.06.2017.Subsequentlyhewasarrestedon03.07.2017.Duringthetrialthepetitioner, wasgrantedbailhoweversincehemisusedthesaidlibertyandabscondedagain, hewasdeclaredproclaimedoffendervideorderdated28.11.2023.7.Learnedcounselforthepetitionerstatesthatthepetitionerhasonlybeenarrestedonthebasisofadisclosurestatementandapartfromthat, nothingincriminatinghasbeenfoundagainstthepetitioner.
8. Itisfurtherstatedthatthepetitionerhasundergoneincarcerationforaperiodof5years. Theprosecutionhascited55witnessesintotal, outofwhichonly16witnesseshavebeenexaminedtilldateandthetrialisunlikelytoconcludeinthenearfuture. 9. LearnedcounselforthepetitionerfurtherplacesrelianceonthejudgmentpassedbytheHon’bleSupremeCourtofIndiainPrabhakarTewarivsStateofUttarPradeshandothers, CriminalAppealNo.152/2020andmoreparticularlypara7whichreadsasunder: “7. OnconsideringthesubmissionsofthelearnedCounselfortheparties. Havingregardtothecircumstancesofthiscase, inouropinion, therehasbeennowrongorimproperexerciseofdiscretiononthepartoftheHighCourtingrantingbailtothe This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/07/2025 at 00:30:35 Accused. ThefactorsoutlinedinthecaseofMahipal(supra)fortestingthelegalityofanordergrantingbailareabsentintheorderimpugned.
Thematerialsavailabledonotjustifyarrivingattheconclusionthattheorderimpugnedsuffersfromnon-applicationofmindorthereasonforgrantingbailisnotborneoutfromaprima-facieviewoftheevidenceonrecord. TheoffenceallegednodoubtisgraveandseriousandthereareseveralcriminalcasespendingagainsttheAccused. Thesefactorsbythemselvescannotbethebasisforrefusalofprayerforbail. TheHighCourthasexerciseditsdiscretioningrantingbailtotheAccusedVikramSinghuponconsideringrelevantmaterials. Noex-facieerrorintheorderhasbeenshownbytheAppellantwhichwouldestablishexerciseofsuchdiscretiontobeimproper. WeaccordinglysustaintheorderoftheHighCourtgrantingbail. Thisappealisdismissed.” 10. PerContra, Mr.Sabharwal, learnedAPPstatesthatthepetitionerhasearlieralsobeengrantedbail, howeverhemisusedthesaidliberty. Further, thereare6othercasespendingagainstthepetitioner. 11. Ihaveheardlearnedcounselfortheparties. 12. Inthepresentcase, thepetitionerhasbeenarrestedonthebasisofthedisclosurestatementofRahulKhan@Dawood(co-accused)andnoweaponpertainingtotheallegedincidentofmurderhasbeenrecoveredattheinstanceofthepetitioner.
Further, themainaccusedi.e.RahulKhan@Dawood, attheinstanceofwhom, thebodywasrecoveredhasalreadybeengrantedbailbythelearnedSessionsCourton01.05.2024.13.Asperthenominalrolldated17.12.2024,thepetitionerhas This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/07/2025 at 00:30:35 undergoneincarcerationforaperiodof4years10monthsand2days. Asoftoday, anotherperiodof3monthshaselapsedandthepetitionerwouldhaveundergoneincarcerationforabout5yearsand1month. 14. Eventhoughthepetitionerwasdeclaredaproclaimedoffender, thepetitionerhasbeengrantedinterimbailfor90daysfrom08.07.2021to05.10.2021andhesurrenderedon15.12.2021.15.Iamoftheviewthateventhoughtheallegationsagainstthepetitionerareseriousandgraveinnatureandthepetitionerisaccusedofcommittingmurder, howeverthefactremainsthatthepetitionerisstillandundertrialprisonerandhasundergoneincarcerationforaconsiderableperiodoftime.
Tillthetrialisconcluded, thereisapresumptionofinnocenceinhisfavour. 16. Further, theprosecutionhascited55witnessesintotal, outofwhichonly16witnesseshavebeenexaminedtilldate. Tomymind, thetrialisnotlikelytoconcludeinthenearfuture. Article21isparamountandeveryaccusedisentitledtoaspeedytrial. Inthe6casespendingagainstthepetitioner,2havealreadybeenclosedand4arepending. Thedetailsareasunder: Sr.No.CaseFIRNo.UnderSectionStatusofCase1224/2017,PSAmbedkarNagar, NewDelhi.25/54/59ofArmsActChargeSheethasbeenfiledbeforetheCourtconcerned. ThecaseislistedforMisc. Appearanceon08/07/2025 This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/07/2025 at 00:30:35 PendingforwantofsanctionunderSection35oftheArmsActfromtheDCPconcerned.2274/2017,PSAmbedkarNagar.25/54/59ofArmsActAccusedhasbeenacquittedbytheconcernedcourton07.10.2017.3692/2021,PSAmbedkarNagar, NewDelhi.25ofArmsActUncontested-Disposedon03.03.2022Cognizancedenied4210/2022,PSAmbedkarNagar, NewDelhi.25ofArmsActChargeSheethasbeenfiledbeforetheCourtconcerned.
ThecaseislistedforMisc. Appearanceon09.07.2025;FSLawaited.501/2023,PSAmbedkar392/34ofIPCChargeSheethasbeenfiledbeforetheCourtconcerned. The This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/07/2025 at 00:30:35 Nagar, NewDelhi.caseislistedforargumentonchargeon23.07.2025.615/2024,PSTilakNagar, NewDelhi.25ofArmsAct&34ofIPCThecaseispendinginvestigation. 17. Forthesaidreasons, thepresentpetitionisallowedandthepetitionerisdirectedtobereleasedonbailsubjecttothefollowingtermsandconditions:-a.ThepetitionershallfurnishapersonalbondinthesumofRs10,000/-(Rupeestenthousandonly)eachwith1suretyinthelikeamount, tothesatisfactionoftheconcernedtrialcourt;b.Thepetitionershallnotleavethecountrywithoutthepermissionofthecompetentcourtandifthepetitionerhasapassport, heshallsurrenderthesamebeforetheconcernedtrialcourt;c.ThepetitionershallfurnishtotheIOconcernedthecellphonenumberonwhichthepetitionermaybecontactedatanytimeandshallensurethatthenumberiskeptactiveandswitchedonatalltimes;d.ThepetitionerwillfurnishhispermanentaddresstotheconcernedIOandincasehechangeshisaddress, hewillinformtheIOconcerned; This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/07/2025 at 00:30:35 e.Thepetitionershallnotindulgeinanyactoromissionthatisunlawful, illegalorthatwouldprejudicetheproceedingsinpendingcases, ifany;f.ThepetitionershallappearinCourtoneverydateofhearingunlessexempted;g.Thepetitionershallnotcommunicatewith, orcomeintocontactwiththecomplainantoranyoftheprosecutionwitnesses, ortamperwiththeevidenceofthecase. 18. Nothingstatedhereinaboveshalltantamounttoanexpressionofopiniononthemeritsofthecase. 19. Thepetitionstandsdisposedofintheaforesaidterms.JASMEETSINGH,JMARCH4,2025/pkClickheretocheckcorrigendum, ifany
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.