Heinousness Of Crime Is A Very Important Factor: Delhi HC Refuses To Grant Bail To Man Who Allegedly Killed His Lover's Husband

The Delhi High Court has refused to grant bail to a man who was accused of killing husband of the lady he was in love with. The Court held that the heinousness of the crime is a very important factor which has to be kept in mind while deciding whether to grant or decline an application for bail.

The accused had approached the Court seeking bail in an FIR registered against him for the offences under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

A Single Bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad said, “Petitioner is accused of a very serious crime. The facts of the case and the depositions point towards the complicity of the Petitioner. Petitioner is accused of killing the husband of the lady he was in love with. Material on record discloses that the Petitioner won the confidence of the deceased even though he was in love with his wife. Crime has been committed in a very brutal manner and the Petitioner has tried to mislead the Police at first and has also tried to give it a colour of an accident.”

The Bench noted that 12 witnesses have been examined and a few public witnesses remain to be examined and the prosecution witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution.

Advocates Jaiveer and Irshad appeared for the petitioner/accused while APP Priyanka Dalal appeared for the respondent/State.

Factual Background -

As per the prosecution, in 2019, the police received an information that somebody has killed the brother-in-law of the caller. The said information was entered into diary and the same was entrusted to SI for further necessary action. Thereafter, the police reached the spot where the caller (petitioner) was found present and he showed the dead body of the deceased man, which was in two pieces on two different places on the railway track. The petitioner alleged to have tried to give the incident a colour of train accident. Since there were discrepancies in the narration of the petitioner, he was interrogated thoroughly on which he confessed that he was friends with the deceased’s wife and that he liked her. The petitioner stated that the deceased used to harass his wife.

On the date of the incident, when the deceased’s wife went to her sister’s house, the petitioner utilized the opportunity, called the deceased, and took him to the deserted road of the railway. He allegedly hit the deceased on his head several times with a piece of brick lying there due to which he became distraught and then the petitioner threw him in front of a passing train which dragged him and cut him in two pieces. Hence, a case was registered against the petitioner. In his statement, he confessed to have killed the deceased. The police during investigation found that the petitioner was in touch with the deceased’s wife and his roommate also revealed that he saw photos of her on his phone and revealed to him that she was his girlfriend with whom he used to talk regularly.

The High Court in view of the facts and circumstances of the case observed, “The heinousness of crime is a very important factor which has to be kept in mind while deciding whether to grant or decline an application for bail. … this Court is of the opinion that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the Petitioner has committed the offence.”

The Court added that the petitioner is accused of committing murder in a brutal fashion and if convicted, he is likely to be sentenced to imprisonment for life or even death.

“Even though the Petitioner is in custody for three years and three months now and substantial progress has taken place in the trial and most of the witnesses have been examined, but looking at the nature of the offence and the manner in which the Petitioner has committed the offence this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the Petitioner at this juncture”, it concluded.

Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the bail application of the accused.

Cause Title- Gulkesh Kumar v. The State NCT of Delhi (Neutral Citation: 2024:DHC:5492)

Click here to read/download the Judgment