Mere Reproduction Of Evidence Can Never Be Equated With Appreciation: Karnataka High Court Quashes Penalty Against Govt Employee Accused Cannot Repeatedly Send Cheque To FSL Till Favourable Report Is Obtained: Kerala High Court In NI Act Case Succession Certificate Cannot Be Issued For Gold Jewels Pledged With Bank, Applies Only To Debts And Securities: Madras High Court Order 11 Rule 14 CPC | Court Cannot Direct Production Of Documents Without Ascertaining They Are In Party's Possession: Calcutta High Court Undertrial Prisoners Don't Suffer 'Civil Death', Retain Fundamental Right To Alienate Property From Jail: Rajasthan High Court Direction For Reasonable Annual Enhancement Of Maintenance Under Section 125 CrPC Merely Preserves Its Real Value Against Inflation: Delhi High Court Testimony Of Sole Interested Witness Must Be Of 'Sterling Quality' To Base Conviction: Patna High Court Acquits Murder Convict Failure To Communicate Written Grounds Of Arrest Renders Arrest Constitutionally Infirm, Accused Entitled To Bail: Punjab & Haryana High Court Section 482 CrPC Petition Not Maintainable Against Order Framing Charge Under SC/ST Act, Appeal Lies Under Section 14A: Tripura High Court Disputed Questions Of Fact Regarding Title And Forged Documents Cannot Be Decided Under Article 226: Telangana High Court Matter To Be Enquired By Bar Council: Madhya Pradesh High Court Dismisses Lawyer's PILs With Costs For Suppressing Attorney-Client Relationship BDA Cannot Arbitrarily Reverse Resolutions Passed To Comply With Judicial Directives: Karnataka High Court Section 52A NDPS Act: Mere Non-Compliance Does Not Automatically Vitiate Trial Unless Evidence Is Doubtful: Punjab & Haryana High Court Seniority Must Be Determined From Date Of Substantive Appointment, Not Ad-Hoc Service: Allahabad High Court Uncorroborated Testimony Of Drug Inspector Cannot Form Sole Basis For Conviction Under Drugs Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court Suppression Of Adverse Facts Strikes At Root Of Equitable Jurisdiction: Bombay High Court Denies Injunction In HUF Property Dispute

Delhi High Court Grants Bail in 2015 Hauz Khas Murder Case Citing Weak Prosecution and Long Incarceration

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court today granted bail to Vikas Balguer @ Shammi and Ashish Balguer, implicated in the 2015 Hauz Khas murder case. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vikas Mahajan, while pronouncing the judgment, observed that the weak prosecution case, coupled with the long incarceration of the accused, tilted the balance in favor of granting bail.

The Court considered the fundamental principle of presumption of innocence at the pre-conviction stage and the purpose of custody, which is to ensure the accused’s availability during the trial. The Court opined that an indefinite period of custody, especially in the face of an uncertain trial conclusion, might lead to grave injustice if the accused are ultimately acquitted.

The case arose from a complaint filed by Rohit Bansal about a fight that occurred on the intervening night of October 21-22, 2015, at Shanghai-30 Bar and Restaurant in Hauz Khas, leading to the death of Rupesh. The FIR registered included charges under Sections 302/308/201/212/34 IPC. The petitioners sought regular bail after being in custody for over 7 years and 8 months.

The Court meticulously analyzed the testimonies of key eyewitnesses, noting significant inconsistencies and contradictions in their statements. The key witnesses, including PW2 Rohit Bansal, PW3 Sagar Sharma, and PW4 Jitender Sharma, either partially or wholly resiled from their earlier statements. Additionally, the Court noted the clean antecedents of petitioner Ashish Balguer and the acquittal of Vikas Balguer @ Shammi in another case.

Granting bail, the Court directed the petitioners to furnish a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 each with two sureties of the like amount. The Court imposed conditions including appearance before the Court as required, maintaining working mobile numbers, and refraining from any criminal activity or contact with witnesses/complainants.

The Court clarified that its observations were solely for considering the bail application and should not influence the trial’s merits.

Date of Decision: 15.02.2024

VIKAS BALGUER @ SHAMMI VS GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI

Latest Legal News