Research › Search › Judgment

Delhi High Court · body

2007 DIGILAW 887 (DEL)

SATISH KUMAR BHOLA @Sonu v. STATE

2007-04-30

REVA KHETRAPAL

body2007
REVA KHETRAPAL, J. ( 1 ) NOTICE. Learned Addl. Public Prosecutor accepts notice. ( 2 ) BY this application bail is sought by the petitioner in a case registered against him under Sections 365/396/302/120-B/201/412/34 I. P. C. ( 3 ) ALLEGATIONS of the prosecution are that a criminal conspiracy was hatched between one Mamta Bhardwaj, her husband Lokender Bhardwaj, three friends of her husband from Gwalior, namely, Sunil Verma, Shiv Narayan Prasad and raghunath Singh and the present petitioner, who is the son-in-law of Mamta bhardwaj and Lokender Bhardwaj. Pursuant to the said conspiracy, the deceased t. R. Malhotra was called to the house of Mamta Bhardwaj (mother-in-law of the petitioner), where he was done to death by administration of chloroform by the petitioner. Thereafter his belongings were thrown in Budiyawala Nala at faridabad, and the pillow by which the deceased was strangulated and bed sheet were thrown in Kadkal forest by the present petitioner. Thereafter the dead body was thrown in a canal ahead of Mathura. The car of the deceased was then taken to Jaipur (Rajasthan) where it was found abandoned at Durga Marg by the local police and handed over to the police of P. S. Sadar, Jaipur. On the disclosure of the petitioner and at his instance, jewellery belonging to the deceased was recovered from a pipe in the ground floor bathroom of the house of the petitioner, wrapped in a polythene, as also a mobile phone No. 9891397886. ( 4 ) THE plea for bail is pressed on the ground that the star witness of the prosecution PW5 Amar Nath Bhatia is stated to have turned hostile and PW13 HC bijender Singh is stated to have turned partially hostile. I have carefully perused the testimony of PW13 H. C. Bijender Singh, who has categorically stated it was at the instance of the petitioner and on his pointing out that the jewellery and the mobile phone were recovered by the Investigating Officer from a small drain in the ground floor of the house of the petitioner at D-23, jangpura, Bhogal. As such, to my mind, the mere fact that PW13 HC Bijender Singh may not have deposed with accuracy about certain other facts, such as the initials on the seals affixed by the Investigating Officer on the pulandas seized in his presence, does not mean that the whole of his testimony is to be discarded. As such, to my mind, the mere fact that PW13 HC Bijender Singh may not have deposed with accuracy about certain other facts, such as the initials on the seals affixed by the Investigating Officer on the pulandas seized in his presence, does not mean that the whole of his testimony is to be discarded. ( 5 ) LEARNED Addl. Public Prosecutor also points out that the present application is filed by the petitioner on 17th February, 2007, after the bail application of the petitioner was rejected by the learned trial court on 3rd june, 2006, but it is not stated in the application as to what evidence was adduced by the prosecution before the trial court during the period 3rd June 2006 and 17th February 2007. ( 6 ) I have verbally enquired from the counsel for the petitioner as regards the evidence adduced against the petitioner during this period, but he states that he is not in a position to answer my query. Learned Addl. Public prosecutor, on the other hand, points out that 22 witnesses have been examined by the trial court till today and the bulk of the evidence is against the petitioner and that the case is listed for the recording the remaining evidence of the prosecution witnesses on the 10th, 11th and 12th of July, 2007. ( 7 ) KEEPING in view the grave and heinous nature of the offence alleged to have been committed by the petitioner in conspiracy with his co-conspirators, which has resulted in the loss of a precious human life for the sake of some jewellery and the fact that the trial is at its fag end, I do not think this to be a fit case for enlarging the petitioner on bail at this stage. ( 8 ) THE application for bail is accordingly dismissed. ( 9 ) AFTER the dismissal of the bail application, counsel for the petitioner seeks to challenge the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. The bail application having been dismissed, it is left open to the petitioner to take recourse to the remedy available to him in law in this regard, if so advised.