The High Court of Delhi rejected a bail application challenging the lack of parity with co-accused. The court held that the petitioner, as the alleged mastermind, faced stronger prosecution evidence regarding motive and conspiracy, making no case for release.
The petition for bail was dismissed; the petitioner remains in judicial custody.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~4
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Decided on: 01st April, 2019
SATBIR RANA ..... Petitioner
Through: Ms. Geeta Luthra, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Anjana Ahluwalia, Advocate
versus
STATE ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for State Mr. Pradeep Teotia and Mr. Siddharth Chaturvedi, Advocates for the complainant
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA
ORDER (ORAL)
Bail appln. 246/2019
Page 1 of 5
Ghazipur, NH-24, Ghazipur. It may be mentioned here that according to the case for prosecution, Nikhil Rana, son of the petitioner herein, is the person who used the firearm to commit the murder, the weapon alongwith certain ammunition statedly having been recovered from his possession, at his instance on 15.10.2014, from its place of concealment in an almirah at the second floor of house no.B-63, Gali no.6, Gazipur Dairy Farm, where both, the petitioner and Nikhil Rana, were residing. The other persons facing trial include Brijesh, Rupesh and Parth Sharma.
Bail appln. 246/2019
Page 2 of 5
Dairy Farm and having caused him huge monetary loss by dealing in the sale-purchase of a property described as bearing no.C-42, Ghazipur Dairy Farm, known as “ Kasturi Ki Dairy ”, inspite of being asked by the petitioner to desist from indulging in any such transaction. It may be mentioned here that there is evidence available to show that both the petitioner and the deceased were engaged in the business of property dealing. There is also evidence adduced to show that on account of the said past enmity, the petitioner had extended threats to the victim, his conduct after the offence of murder also having reflected connection between the said event and the deal concerning “ Kasturi Ki Dairy ”, suspicion in this regard having been raised on account of he having confronted Sanjay, the elder brother of the deceased on such lines.
Bail appln. 246/2019
Page 3 of 5
Bail appln. 246/2019
Page 4 of 5
which the agreement to sell had been entered. These submissions, it may be observed, only reinforce the prosecution case that there had been a cause for dispute between the petitioner and the deceased, the stakes apparently being quite high.
9. The petition is dismissed.
R.K.GAUBA, J.
APRIL 01, 2019 yg
Bail appln. 246/2019
Page 5 of 5
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail on parity with other accused given the distinct motive and alleged complicity attributed to him.
Whether the evidence requires the High Court to conduct a parallel scrutiny of the prosecution case at the bail stage.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Avtar Singh vs. State of PunjabDistinguished¶5
Avtar Singh vs. State of Punjab, (2010) 15 SCC 529 · Who else cites this
Pankaj @ Mintu vs. Govt. of NCT of DelhiDistinguished¶5
Pankaj @ Mintu vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi, 2016 SCC Online Del 2328 · Who else cites this
Rahul Tongaria vs. NCT of Delhi & ANRDistinguished¶5
Rahul Tongaria vs. NCT of Delhi & ANR, 2016 SCC Online Del 4501 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Satbir Rana
State
R.K. Gauba
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
R.K. Gauba
Parties & counsel
