Absence of Videography Alone Not Sufficient For Bail When Custody is Less Than a Year: Delhi High Court Refuses Bail in Commercial Quantity Heroin Use of Permitted Synthetic Colour in Dal Masur Still Constitutes Adulteration: Punjab & Haryana High Court Uphold Conviction Penalty Must Not Result in Civil Death of Professionals: Delhi High Court Reduces Two-Year Suspension of Insolvency Professional, Citing Disproportionate Punishment Right of Cross-Examination is Statutory, Cannot Be Denied When Documents Are Exhibited Later: Chhattisgarh High Court Allows Re-Cross-Examination Compounding after Adjudication is Impermissible under FEMA: Calcutta High Court Declines Post-Adjudication Compounding Plea Tears of a Child Speak Louder Than Words: Bombay HC Confirms Life Term for Man Who Raped 4-Year-Old Alleged Dowry Death After Forced Remarriage: Allahabad High Court Finds No Evidence of Strangulation or Demand “Even If Executant Has No Title, Registrar Must Register the Document If Formalities Are Met” — Supreme Court  Declares Tamil Nadu's Rule 55A(i) Ultra Vires the Registration Act, 1908 Res Judicata Is Not Optional – It’s Public Policy: Supreme Court Slams SEBI for Passing Second Final Order in Fraud Case Against Vital Communications Ltd A Person Has Died… Insurance Company Cannot Escape Liability Without Proving Policy Violation: Supreme Court Slams High Court for Exonerating Insurer in Fatal Accident Case Calling Someone by Caste Name Is Not Enough – It Must Be Publicly Done to Attract SC/ST Act: Supreme Court Acquits All in Jharkhand Land Dispute Case Broken Promises Don’t Make Rape – Mature Adults in Long-Term Relationships Must Accept Responsibility: Supreme Court Quashes Rape Case Against NRI Man Every Broken Relationship Can’t Be Branded Rape: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Retired Judge Accused of Sexual Exploitation on Promise of Marriage No Evidence, No Motive, Not Even Proof of Murder: Supreme Court Slams Conviction, Acquits Man Accused of Killing Wife After Two Years of Marriage You Can’t Assume Silence Is Consent: Supreme Court Sends Back ₹46 Lakh Insurance Dispute to NCDRC for Fresh Determination “Voyage Must Start and End Before Monsoon Sets In — But What If That’s Practically Impossible?” SC Rules Against Insurance Company in Shipping Dispute No Criminal Case Can Be Built on a Land Deal That’s Three Decades Old Without Specific Allegations: Supreme Court Upholds Quashing of FIR Against Ex-JK Housing Chief

Common Intention in Crime Inseparable, Bail Denied in Murder Case: Delhi High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Delhi High Court, in a recent ruling on February 16, 2024, dismissed a bail application underlining the principle of common intention under Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) in a case involving a homicidal death. The case, presided over by Hon’ble Ms. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, highlights the significance of collective responsibility in crimes involving multiple accused.

The case (BAIL APPLN. 3733/2023) revolves around the FIR No. 709/2020, registered for an offence punishable under Sections 302/34 of the IPC. The petitioner, Deepak, sought regular bail for his involvement in a fatal stabbing incident reported on July 11, 2020. The prosecution’s case, based on eyewitness accounts, including that of the deceased’s sister, Smt. Deepmala, depicted a grisly scene where the victim was allegedly stabbed by co-accused Saif Ali and others, including the petitioner.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma meticulously analyzed the material on record, notably focusing on the concept of ‘common intention’. The Court observed, “when a criminal act is done by several persons in furtherance of the common intention of all, each of such persons is liable for that act in the same manner as if it were done by him alone.” The Court found the petitioner’s argument, claiming he did not cause the fatal Injury, to be without merit. It was noted that the petitioner was part of the group that collectively inflicted injuries leading to the victim’s death.

The Court also considered the testimonies of PW-1 (Deepmala) and PW-3 (the mother of the deceased), who supported the prosecution’s case and mentioned threats from the accused. The gravity of the offence and the impact on the victim’s family were pivotal in the Court’s decision to deny bail.

Given the severity of the crime and the principle of common intention, the Court denied regular bail to the petitioner, Deepak, stating, “the gravity of the offence is the basis of deciding as to whether the bail can be granted to an accused or not.” The Court emphasized the seriousness of the offence, which could potentially lead to life imprisonment or a death sentence upon conviction.

Date of Decision:  16.02.2024

DEEPAK VS STATE OF N.C.T. OF DELHI

 

Similar News