Order 25

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: SC No. 350/2024
IA No. 10/2025
State Vs. Rohit @ Bitoo
FIR No. 233/2024
PS Harsh Vihar
U/S 304/34 IPC
20.05.2025
This is 3rd application u/s 483 BNSS for grant of
regular bail moved on behalf of applicant/accused Rohit @
Bitoo.
Present:- Sh. Sobit, Ld. Additional PP for the State.
Sh. R K Kochar, Sh. Arun Joshi and Ms. Deepti, Ld.
Counsels for applicant/accused.
IO/SI Nitin Kumar in person.
ORDER
1. It is argued by Ld. counsel for applicant/accused that
he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he is in JC
since 30.05.2024. The present FIR was registered on 24.04.2024
on the basis of GD No. 28A dt. 23.04.2024 and the incident took
place on 20.04.2024 to 21.04.2024, however, the FIR was
registered on 24.04.2024 after an unexplained delay of three
days. There is no ill will or enmity with the deceased prior to the
alleged incident and during incident, verbal hot exchange was
going on with Pankaj and Himanshu and the deceased intervened
in the matter and during that process, the deceased allegedly
received fist and leg blows. In fact, the applicant has not caused
any leg and fist blows to the deceased on his abdomen and on
20.04.2024, the deceased was in his house after receipt of alleged
injuries and deceased has expired due to septic infection in his
body and the deceased and his family members had not provided
Page 1 of 7
-- 1 of 7 --
proper and adequate treatment to the deceased in reputed hospital
and the lapses have been done on the part of the family members
of deceased.
2. It is further submitted that investigation is complete
and charge-sheet has been filed, which has shown four eye
witnesses namely PW1 Parag, PW2 Himanshu, PW4 Priyanshu
and PW5 Himanshu @ Lingodi as eye witnesses of the incident
and on that basis, the Hon’ble Court has framed the charges
against all four accused persons including the applicant and said
witnesses have already been examined and cross-examined and
they have not alleged anything against the applicant/accused and
Ld. PP declared all of them hostile and thoroughly cross-
examined all the witnesses, but nothing came forward against
the applicant/accused. The remaining witnesses namely
Bhujveer, Sachin and Abhishek, brother of deceaesd Harsh, are
not the eye-witnesses of the incident.
3. It is further submitted that statement of Abhishek
was recorded on 23.08.2024 after 4 months of alleged incident
wherein it is alleged that on 21.04.2024, the deceased disclosed
that three boys namely Pankaj, Rocky and Bittu had beaten him,
but he did not make any PCR call on 21.04.2024 nor he went to
the PS to lodge any report against the accused persons and on
21.04.2024, his brother namely Harsh was got admitted in GTB
Hospital by him, but he did not disclose to concerned doctor at
the time of preparation of MLC of Harsh that Harsh had
disclosed the name of the accused persons, who had beaten him
and after 4 months of alleged incident, he has falsely stated
before the police. The Hon’ble Court has granted regular bail to
Page 2 of 7
-- 2 of 7 --
co-accused Ankit on 27.02.2025. There is no previous
involvement of applicant/accused. One of the main accused
namely Pankaj Gautam has already been granted default bail by
Ld. JMFC vide order dated 29.08.2024.
4. It is further submitted that witness Sachin recorded
alleged mobile recording of deceased Harsh, but the police has
not seized or recovered his mobile, in which alleged recording
was available, so that the authenticity of the alleged recording is
doubtful and suspicious. The first bail application of the
applicant/accused was dismissed by Ld. ASJ on 10.09.2024 and
second was dismissed as withdrawn on 27.11.2024. Hon’ble
Court granted interim bail to applicant/accused on two occasions
and he had not misused the liberty nor threatened any witness
during interim bail and on 03.05.2025, the applicant/accused
surrendered before jail authority and he is not involved in any
criminal case and nothing incriminating has been recovered from
his possession or at his instance and trial will take considerable
time and applicant/accused cannot be kept in custody for
indefinite period and he is not a previous convict nor involved in
any other case and complainant has leveled the false and
frivolous allegations against him being employee in the grocery
shop.
5. Ld. Addl. PP for the State has opposed the bail
application on the ground of gravity of offence and that
applicant/accused has played an active role in the crime and if
released on bail, he may influence the remaining eye-witnesses
and death of deceased was caused due to the injuries, caused by
beatings by the applicant/accused, who acted in furtherance of
Page 3 of 7
-- 3 of 7 --
common intention with co-accused and he is FIR named and also
named by the deceased to his brother before his death and
complainant has not been examined.
6. Complainant Abhishek, who is brother of deceased,
has filed his No Objection by way of affidavit and also stated that
he has no objection, if applicant/accused is granted bail and there
is no pressure or threat to him in making the said statement and
that deceased never told him that accused Pankaj, Rocky and
Rohit @ Bittu had beaten him.
7. IO has filed a reply and opposed the bail application.
8. I have heard the rival contentions of the bail
application and perused the record.
9. As per the case of prosecution, on 23.04.2024, a
PCR call vide DD No. 28A was received that injured Harsh was
admitted in GTB Hospital after the quarrel. On 24.04.2024, the
patient was on ventilator at the said hospital and he was declared
unfit by the doctor and IO recorded the statement of brother of
deceased namely Abhishek, who alleged that injured Harsh was
his brother, who told him that on 20.04.2024, he had gone in the
marriage of his known at Jail Road, Harsh Vihar, Delhi and when
he returned on 21.04.2024, he told that 3-4 persons namely
Rocky, Pankaj and Rohit @ Bittu, who were residents of Saboli,
had beaten him mercilessly and the complainant had not made
any police complaint as there were no visible injuries, but
condition of Harsh was deteriorating with time as he had suffered
internal injuries due to which, he was admitted to GTB Hospital
on 22.04.2024 and the doctor declared him unfit.
Page 4 of 7
-- 4 of 7 --
10. The FIR was registered u/s 308 IPC at PS Harsh
Vihar and later on, when he died during the investigation, charge-
sheet was filed u/s 304/34 IPC. The reason for delay in FIR is
explained that since there were no visible injury, immediately the
FIR was not lodged, but it was lodged after the deceased suffered
some discomfort/ pain in abdomen due to internal injuries caused
by the accused persons and applicant/accused is named in the
statement given by complainant Abhishek on 28.04.2024. Ld.
Counsel has highlighted that there is no date and time in the
MLC of deceased Harsh at GTB Hospital wherein he was
declared fit. In the FIR, applicant/accused is named alongwith
Pankaj and Rocky and brother of deceased namely Abhishek in
his statement u/s 161 Cr.PC dt. 23.08.2024, has named the
applicant/accused and in his subsequent statement dt. 28.04.2024
also, he has named the applicant/accused. The said complainant
Abhishek has appeared and submits that he has no threat from the
accused persons and his deceased brother had never told him that
applicant/accused or others had beaten him.
11. During treatment, deceased had expired on
28.04.2024 and as per PMR, cause of death is “septic shock as a
result of peritonitis due to traumatic perforation of duodenum
consequent upon blunt force trauma to the abdomen”. There were
3 ante mortem injuries in the form of abrasions and bruise.
12. Charge framed against accused is u/s 304/34 IPC.
Four eye-witnesses namely Parag, Himanshu, Priyanshu and
Himanshu @ Lingodi have already been examined and
discharged and they have not supported the case of prosecution at
all and complainant Abhishek is not an eye-witness and he has
Page 5 of 7
-- 5 of 7 --
furnished a written affidavit that he has no objection and the
name of applicant/accused as the assailant was not told by his
deceased brother, however, such affidavits have no legal sanctity,
but considering the oral submissions of complainant as above, it
is apparent that he has no apprehension of threat from any of the
accused persons. Two co-accused Pankaj and Ankit have already
been granted bail. He was granted interim bail and he had not
misused the liberty.
13. Considering the above facts and circumstances of
the case, the 3rd regular bail application of applicant/accused
Rohit @ Bittu is allowed and he is admitted to regular bail on his
furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 30,000/- with one
surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the Court, subject to
following conditions:-
1. That the accused will appear before the court regularly
during trial and shall not seek frequent adjournments.
2. In case of change of residential address or contact details, the
applicant shall promptly inform the same to the concerned
Investigating Officer/SHO as well as to the concerned Court.
3. That accused will not contact complainant and his family
members or any prosecution witness directly or indirectly in
any manner.
4. That accused shall not commit any crime during bail.
5. That accused will not leave the country without the
permission of the Court.
Nothing mentioned herein shall tantamount to any
expression on the merits of the case.
Page 6 of 7
-- 6 of 7 --
The bail application is accordingly disposed of.
Copy of this order be sent to Jail superintendent
concerned, IO/SHO concerned and be given dasti to Ld. counsel
for accused.
(Kumar Rajat)
ASJ-07/SHD/KKD Courts/Delhi
20.05.2025
Page 7 of 7
-- 7 of 7 --