The Delhi High Court has granted bail to two persons, facing prosecution in a case of murder and criminal conspiracy relating to last year’s riots in north-east Delhi.
Justice Suresh Kumar Kait said: “Keeping in view that petitioner is in judicial custody since April 02, 2020, and trial of the case shall take substantial time, without commenting on merit of the case, this court is of the opinion that the petitioners deserve bail.”
The High Court also said that “the veracity of the allegations” alleged against the accused, Pradeep Rai and Aman Kashyap, shall be tested at trial.
The duo, in their respective petitions, had sought bail in connection with an FIR registered at police station Dayalpur, Delhi. Both the accused are facing offences under Sections 302 (murder), 147 (rioting), 148 (rioting, armed with deadly weapon), 149 (unlawful assembly), 120B (criminal conspiracy) and 34 (common intent) of the Indian Penal Code.
They argued that one of the eyewitnesses, is also an eyewitness in multiple FIRs registered at Dayalpur police station in connection with the riots on February 25, which took place in Gali No. 10 as well as in Gali No.3.
“There is distance of around 500-700 meters between Gali No. 10 and Gali No. 3 and therefore, he seems to be planted witness,” the counsel had argued.
On the last date of hearing, The High Court had directed the police to verify as to how this witness had seen the incident which took place in Gali No. 10 and Gali No.3. The police, in its response, stated that the distance between Gali No.10 and Gali No.3 is about 350 m.
“In the prima facie opinion of this court, it is possible that the eyewitness, who in the present case is a resident of Gali No.8, might have seen the incident taking place in Gali No.10, which is close to his place but how the eyewitness could see the present incident, which has taken place in Gali No.3, and away from Gali No.10 and Gali No.8, is doubtful,” Justice Kait noted.
The High Court, while granting bail to the two accused, directed them not to “directly or indirectly influence any prosecution witnesses”.
