Order 20

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: IN THE COURT OF MS. SURABHI SHARMA VATS, ASJ-04
(SHAHDARA), KARKARDOOMA COURTS, DELHI
SC No. 388/2023, IA No. 10/2025
State Vs. Kuldeep @ Landa
FIR No. 476/2023
PS Harsh Vihar
U/s 302/307/34 IPC
07.11.2025
File is taken up on an application under Section 439
Cr.P.C. for grant of bail to the applicant/accused namely Kuldeep @
Landa.
Present: Sh. S.K. Dubey, Ld. Addl. PP for the State.
Sh. Alok Sharma and Sh. Mukesh Verma, Ld. Counsels
for applicant/accused.
Arguments on the present bail application heard.
1. It is submitted by Ld. Counsel for the applicant/ accused
that applicant/ accused has been falsely implicated in the present case;
that applicant/accused is in JC since more than one and a half years;
that the chargesheet was filed only against the accused persons
namely Ranjeet @ Chander, Himanshu, Himanshu Sharma and
Gaurav; that initially the applicant/accused was made the witness in
the present case; that the applicant/accused Kuldeep @ Landa and the
complainant identified co-accused accused persons Ranjeet @
Chander, Himanshu, Himanshu Sharma and Gaurav during the
investigation of the present case and the applicant/accused also stood
as one of the witness of their arrest and also of the incident in
question.
2. Ld. Counsel for applicant/accused has submitted that
statement of complainant/victim was initially recorded on 14.08.2023
where the complainant/victim has not uttered any single word against
the applicant/accused; that complainant Mohit has changed his
-- 1 of 6 --
version after more than 10 days and lodged the complaint dated
25.08.2023 which is completely contradictory with his statement
dated 14.08.2023; that the complaint dated 25.08.2023 is afterthought
and it is lodged by the complainant Mohit as an afterthought to
blackmail and extort huge amount of money from the
applicant/accused Kuldeep @ Landa.
3. Ld. Counsel for applicant/accused has further submitted
that statement of the complainant under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was
recorded on 04.10.2023 i.e. after more than one and half month of the
incident and the complainant Mohit has stated that accused Vikas @
Kaachari had stabbed the knife to the deceased Saajan, however, in
his statement recorded on 14.08.2023 i.e. on the next day of the
incident, the complainant had stated that accused Gaurav had stabbed
the knife to the deceased Saajan; the weapon of offence/knife has
been recovered at the instance of the accused Gaurav on 14.08.2023.
It is argued that there are material contradictions in the statements of
the complainant which goes to show that the complaint lodged by the
complainant against the applicant/accused is false and is only lodged
with some malafide intentions.
4. It is further submitted that the substantial portion of
evidence of main witness of the present case i.e. complainant has
already been recorded and his examination has been deferred for want
of case property which is stated to be in FSL; that further examination
of PW-1 Complainant is pending since 01.10.2024 as FSL results
have not been received so far; the trial of the matter has been
considerably delay and likely to take some time, therefore, no purpose
would be served by keeping the applicant/accused behind bars; that
the applicant/accused is ready to abide by all the terms and conditions
-- 2 of 6 --
and is also ready to furnish reliable surety to the satisfaction of the
Hon’ble Court, if admitted on bail.
5. Per-contra, Ld. PP for the state has opposed this bail
application while submitting that the allegations and offences against
the accused/ applicant are grave in nature. As per the case of
Prosecution, the accused persons in furtherance of their common
intention, committed deadly attack upon the complainant/injured
Mohit @ Babu and Saajan (deceased) with a knife, pieces of bricks
and stones lying there and consequently killing Saajan.
Ld. Addl. PP for the State has conceded that as per
information received from IO, the applicant/accused has clean
antecedents and that the alleged eye witness/complainant (injured)
has already been examined qua the incident and his examination is
deferred for want of case property which is in FSL. Ld. Addl. PP for
the State has further conceded that as per the intial statement of the
complainant/victim, the applicant/accused Kuldeep @ Landa was not
the initial aggressor and was one of the victims who was attacked
upon by the accused persons and applicant/accused rescued himself
from the scene of crime in order to save his life.
6. Ld. Counsel for the applicant/accused has argued that
applicant/accused is infact the victim of the present case who himself
was attacked upon by the accused persons when he was present with
the complainant Mohit and deceased Saajan and it can be clearly seen
from the newspapers wherein the incident was reported and he has
filed copy of the relevant portions of the newspaper today. It is further
argued that the present case is being considerably delayed in absence
of the FSL result and the applicant/accused is facing judicial custody
in this false case; that applicant/accused had co-operated in the
-- 3 of 6 --
investigation of the present case and had also surrendered before the
Court himself before his arrest and had also surrendered on time when
he was admitted on interim bail, therefore, there are no chances of the
applicant/accused fleeing from justice. Further, the applicant/accused
is also ready to change his residence and is also ready stay away from
the area where the complainant resides, therefore, there is no chance
of inducing him or threatening him. The applicant/accused will face
the entire trial and will appeared before the Court on each and every
date of hearing; that applicant/accused is also ready abide by all the
terms and conditions as imposed by this Hon’ble Court while
admitting him on bail.
7. Arguments on this application heard. Record perused.
8. As per the statement of the complainant dated
14.08.2023, it is stated that the applicant/accused Kuldeep @ Landa
was not the aggressor and was infact one of the victims who was
attacked upon by the accused persons and who rescued himself from
the scene of crime in order to save his life. Nothing has been stated
against the applicant/accused Kuldeep @ Landa in the initial
statement of the complainant/ victim dated 14.08.2023.
Applicant/accused is stated to be in JC for more than one
and half years. Matter is at the stage of trial, however, conclusion of
trial is likely to take considerable time. Any detailed appreciation or
evaluation of evidence and material on record is not warranted at this
stage. There is no previous involvement of the present applicant /
accused. The Ld. Counsel for applicant/accused has submitted that
applicant/accused undertakes to appear before the Court on each and
every date of hearing without fail and applicant/accused is also ready
-- 4 of 6 --
to change his current residence and will not roam around in the
vicinity of the complainant/victim.
Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances
coupled with above stated reasons, this Court deems it fit to enlarge
the applicant/ accused Kuldeep @ Landa on bail. Therefore, the
present bail application stands allowed and applicant/accused
Kuldeep @ Landa is admitted to bail on his furnishing personal bond
in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with one surety of like amount, subject to
the conditions as mentioned hereinbelow:
i) That the accused/ applicant shall convey change of
address immediately to the I.O. and to the Learned
Concerned Court.
ii) That accused/ applicant shall appear before the Court on
dates of hearing;
iii) That the accused/ applicant shall not indulge in any kind of
activities as alleged against him in the present case;
iv) That the accused/ applicant shall not tamper with the
evidence in any manner;
v) That the accused/applicant shall not leave the country
without the previous permission of the Court.
vi) That the accused/applicant shall not, directly or indirectly,
make any inducement, threat or promise to any person
acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him
from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police
officer.
9.
Nothing expressed hereinabove, shall tantamount to any
opinion on the merits of this case.
10. In complicance of directions of Hon’ble Supereme Court
in case titled ‘
In Re: Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail’, Writ Petition
(Crl.) No. 04/2021 dated 31.01.2023, copy of this order be sent to
applicant through concerned Jail Superintendent for information.
-- 5 of 6 --
11. Copy of the order be given dasti to Ld. Counsel for
applicant/ accused and to the I.O, as per rules. Bail application stands
disposed off.
(SURABHI SHARMA VATS)
ASJ-04, Shahdara/KKD Courts,
Delhi/ 07.11.2025
-- 6 of 6 --