Delhi High Court Grants Bail To Man Booked For Murder After His Father Hit Deceased With Knife
The Delhi High Court has granted bail to a man booked for murder after his father hit the deceased with a knife, during a quarrel involving the three.Justice Amit Sharma observed that the Applicant was prima facie not aware that his father was carrying a knife and that he had already spent more than 18 months in prison.“Applicant has been in custody since 24.10.2022 and has spent 1 year...
The Delhi High Court has granted bail to a man booked for murder after his father hit the deceased with a knife, during a quarrel involving the three.
Justice Amit Sharma observed that the Applicant was prima facie not aware that his father was carrying a knife and that he had already spent more than 18 months in prison.
“Applicant has been in custody since 24.10.2022 and has spent 1 year 6 months and 9 days in custody as on 02.05.2024. The applicant is directed to be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety of like amount,” it ordered.
As per Applicant, the deceased abused and assaulted him. Thereafter, when he returned to the house of the deceased with his father, there was a scuffle with the deceased in which his father fell down. After getting up however, the father took out a knife from his waist and attacked the deceased, leading to his demise.
Applicant contended there is no evidence on record to suggest that he was aware or had knowledge that his father was carrying a knife.
The prosecution however relied on witness statements claiming that the Applicant had instigated his father to hit the deceased with the knife.
The Applicant contended the said claim was not there in the witness statement recorded under Section 161 CrPC or in the statements of any other witness as recorded by the Investigating Officer. It was thus claimed that the witness statement is an improvement in the prosecution case.
At the outset, the High Court observed that during cross-examination, the aforesaid witness had stated that the Applicant was not carrying any knife in his hands and that he had taken the knife from the hands of his father after the incident and thrown it at the spot.
Court further noted that the witness had also stated that when the applicant and his father had come to the deceased's house, none of them were carrying any knife in their hands.
Subsequently however, the Court noted, the witness volunteered and said that at the instigation of the Applicant his father had taken out the knife to attack the deceased.
“It is recorded that the witness was confronted with his statement under Section 161 of the CrPC as well as his examination-in-chief where he had not stated the aforesaid fact that at the instigation of the present applicant, father had taken out the knife. In these circumstances, it is seen that even as per the case of the prosecution the knife which was being carried by the father was not visible to anyone and was taken out by him from his waist after being pushed down to the ground at the spot,” the Court said while granting bail.
Appearance: Ms. Nandita Rao, Sr. Adv., Mr. Akhand Pratap Singh, Mr. Varun Singh, Mr. Ankur Raghav, Mr. Paritosh Awasthi, Mr. Himanshu Yadav, Ms. Ashrika Mehra, Mr. Amit Peswani, Mr. Abhinandan Gautam, Mr. Samridhi Dobhal, Mr. Krishna Mohan Chandel, Mr. Hritwik Maurya, Advs. for Petitioner; Mr. Pradeep Gahalot, APP for the State. Insp. Bikramjeet and SI Dharmveer, PS Chhawla. Ms. Aditi Shivadhatri, Ms. Jagrati Singh, Mr. Rajpal, Mr. Rahul, Advs. for R-2.
Case title: Chandan Rai v. State
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 602
Case no.: BAIL APPLN. 1195/2024