The determination of whether a case is fit for the grant of bail involves the balancing of numerous factors, among which the nature of the offence, the severity of the punishment and a prima facie view of the involvement of the accused are important and was upheld by High Court of Delhi through the learned bench led by Justice Subramonium Prasad in the case of GURNAM SINGH vs. THE STATE NCT OF DELHI [BAIL APPLN. 4171/2021] on 31.01.2022.
The facts of the case are that the Complainant had a flight to Dubai. On that day he went to meet his friend, Paras, who took the Complainant along with the belongings and dropped him near Dhaula Kuan petrol pump. Paras then called his friend, Pratap, and told him to come with his car to Dhaula Kuan petrol pump, and after some time, Pratap’s acquaintance, Surjit, came along with his friend Nayyar Qureshi. The Complainant kept his belongings in the dickey of the car and sat in the backseat of the car, with Surjit on the driver’s seat and Pratap in the front passenger seat. Consequently, one boy came, opened the door of the car and sprinkled chilli-like powder in the eyes of the Complainant. Thereafter, the Complainant saw 2-3 boys removing the belongings from the dickey of the car and then they fled towards Gurgaon.
The Petitioner herein was arrested and regular bail application of the Petitioner herein was dismissed by the Ld. Trial Court. The Petitioner has now approached this Court for grant of regular bail.
The Petitioner’s counsel submitted that the instant FIR was lodged after an unexplained delay of 19 hours and it failed to disclose the identity of the Petitioner. He submitted that the petitioner was arrested only on the statement of the co-accused Amrik Singh. He further submitted that the Petitioner is a permanent resident of Delhi and there is not probability of him absconding, therefore, the he should be enlarged on bail.
The Respondents’ counsel opposed the instant bail application on the grounds that the Petitioner has played a crucial role in the commission of the offences alleged in the instant FIR. She submitted that the Petitioner was in constant touch with the key conspirator, Sajjan Singh, and that there is great likelihood that if the Petitioner is released on bail, he will abscond and also there’s a possibility that he’ll tamper with the evidence and influence/threaten the Complainant and other prosecution witnesses.
Considering the facts and circumstances, the Court did not deem it fit to grant bail to the Petitioner as he played a crucial role in the commission of the alleged offence. Therefore, the instant bail application was dismissed.
The Court observed that, “While granting bail the court has to keep in mind not only the nature of the accusations, but the severity of the punishment. The determination of whether a case is fit for the grant of bail involves the balancing of numerous factors, among which the nature of the offence, the severity of the punishment and a prima facie view of the involvement of the accused are important”.
Judgment reviewed by – Shristi Suman