Limitation Act | Litigant Cannot Be Punished For Court's Own Docket Load: J&K High Court Illicit Affair Alone Cannot Make a Man Guilty of Abetting Suicide: Supreme Court Quashes Charge Under Section 306 IPC Landlord Cannot Be Punished for Slowness of Courts: Supreme Court on Bonafide Need in Eviction Suits Expect States To Enact Laws Regulating Unlicensed Money Lenders Charging Exorbitant Interest Contrary To 'Damdupat': Supreme Court Accused Who Skips Lok Adalat After Seeking It, Then Cries 'Prejudice', Cannot Claim Apprehension of Denial of Justice: Madras High Court Refuse To Transfer Case IO Cannot Act Without Prior Sanction: Gujarat High Court Grants Bail, Flags Procedural Lapse in Religious Conversion Case Electricity Board Strictly Liable For Unprotected Transformer, 7-Year-Old Cannot Be Guilty Of Contributory Negligence: Allahabad High Court POCSO Conviction Can't Stand For Offence Not Charged: Delhi High Court Member of Unlawful Assembly Cannot Escape Conviction By Claiming He Only Carried a Lathi and Struck No One: Allahabad High Court Jurisdiction Cannot Be Founded On Casual Or Incidental Facts If Not Have A Direct Nexus With The Lis: : Delhi High Court Clause Stating Disputes "Can" Be Settled By Arbitration Is Not A Binding Arbitration Agreement: Supreme Court State Cannot Plead Helplessness Against Sand Mafia; Supreme Court Warns Of Paramilitary Deployment, Complete Mining Ban In MP & Rajasthan Authority Cannot Withdraw Subsidy Citing Non-Compliance When It Ignored Repeated Requests For Inspection: Supreme Court Out-of-State SC/ST/OBC Candidates Cannot Claim Rajasthan's Reservation Benefits in NEET PG Counselling: Rajasthan High Court Supreme Court Upholds Haryana's Regularisation Of Qualified Ad Hoc Staff As 'One-Time Measure', Strikes Down Futuristic Cut-Offs

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