Bail to be granted if no evidence against the accused is available: Delhi High Court
When the available evidence does not support the conviction of accused or if the contents are too general and do not point towards the accused, then such a person must be released on bail provided he/she would not indulge in any activity contrary to justice. This was held by Hon’ble Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar in the case of Vasim Ali vs. State of NCT Delhi [BAIL APPLN. 1563/2021 and CRL.M.(BAIL) 528/2021 (for interim bail)] on the 12th of August 2021, before the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi at New Delhi.
The brief facts of the case are, on 01.02.2021, PCR calls were received vide DD Nos. 26A and 27A and information regarding murder was received. It is further alleged that the deceased was taken to CRIBS Hospital, Shaheen Bagh, where mother of the deceased, namely, Farida Begum and her sister Saba Khan were present. Husband of the deceased, namely, Amir Ali and father-in-law of the deceased, namely, Abid Ali were also present at the hospital. It is alleged that, at the scene of crime, i.e., at Flat No. C-278/2, 1st Floor, front side, Shaheen Bagh, New Delhi, brother-in-law – petitioner herein, along with his friend Shanur Rehman were found present. Room of the deceased was inspected by crime team and photographs of the crime scene were also taken. It is further alleged that one suicide note allegedly written by deceased was also recovered from the rack of the headboard of bed. In the said suicide note, deceased had leveled allegations against her husband and in-laws. Thereafter, the suicide note was seized at the spot and dead body of the deceased was sent to AIIMS Hospital for preservation. It is further alleged that the concerned SDM was also informed about the incident and family members of the deceased were produced before Ld. SDM. As per the direction of SDM, the Executive Magistrate of Defence Colony, recorded the statements of the family members of the deceased. Farida Begum (Mother), Saba Khan (sister) and Afrin Begum (sister) levelled allegations of harassment, torture and dowry demands against the husband and in-laws of the deceased. Accordingly, FIR No. 28/2021 under Section 498A/304B/34 IPC was registered at Police Station Shaheen Bagh, New Delhi. In the FIR, it is stated by Ms. Farida Begum, mother of the deceased, that marriage of her daughter (deceased herein) was solemnized with Amir Ahsan Ali in the year 2019. At the time of Nikah, they demanded to change some food items in menu as per their choice and demanded AC and Car. They also demanded money and told her that since they are living in a rented house, they want money to purchase a house. She has further alleged that they tortured her daughter mentally and physically, like not giving food to her daughter and did not allow her to go to her mother’s home. They also used to quarrel over petty matters, and during pregnancy she was forced to do household works. It is further alleged that on 13.01.2021, her daughter was beaten by her husband with electric wire. It was alleged that her daughter gave birth to a baby girl so she was again tortured mentally and physically. It is further alleged that on 31.01.2021, deceased informed her mother on phone that her in-laws are not providing her food and locked her in a room. It is further alleged that on 01.02.2020, in the morning, accused Amir Ali called her elder daughter Saba on phone and informed that deceased is not getting pulse, and she along with her daughter reached at CRIBS Hospital where Amir Ali was found sitting alone and her daughter was found dead.
The counsel for the petitioner submitted that, petitioner is an innocent young man and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted by him that petitioner is the brother-in-law of the deceased and there are no specific allegations against the petitioner in the FIR. It is further submitted that even in the alleged suicide note, which according to the prosecution was left behind by the deceased, there are no specific allegations against the present petitioner. It is further submitted that there are chances of the petitioner getting terminated from his job in case he remains behind the bar in a case in which there is not even an iota of evidence against him. It is further submitted that at the time of alleged incident, petitioner was attending his office meeting through video conferencing with a colleague and that the petitioner was nowhere present near the scene of crime. It is further submitted that charge sheet has already been filed. The counsel for the respondent submitted that, family members of the deceased have made statement before the SDM under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and they have levelled allegations regarding torture of the deceased and demand of dowry against the petitioner. It is further submitted that petitioner used to taunt the deceased about her family condition and also demanded car and AC. It is further submitted by learned APP for the State that on 13.01.2021, deceased wanted to visit her family, but the accused did not allow her to go and meet her parents.
The learned judge heard the contentions of both the parties and observed that no specific allegations for demand of dowry or torture against the petitioner. The contents of the suicide note have also been reproduced in the status report. A perusal of the suicide note shows that there are no specific allegations against the petitioner. Whatever allegations are there, either in the FIR or in the suicide note, they are totally general in nature with no specific date or specific act or demand or any cruelty, either physically or mentally. The bail was granted by the court since the evidence was insufficient. The bail was granted by implying a few conditions and to pay the surety.