Delhi HC Grants Bail To Murder Accused As Trial Far From Conclusion

The Delhi High Court, while hearing a bail application of an accused against whom an FIR was registered under Sections 302/394/397/34 IPC, cited Supreme Court's judgment in Satender Kumar Antil vs. CBI 2022 SCC OnLine SC 825 which reiterated that delay in trial and internment for a prolonged period as an under trial must be factored in while dealing with an application for bail.

Justice Asha Menon heard the bail application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C., wherein it was stated that the accused had been in custody since the past 8 years. It was submitted by the counsel for applicant that there were 54 witnesses of the prosecution out of which only 31 had been examined thus far.

The APP for the state, argued, that it was the applicant who had led the co-accused to commit the crime as the decease was the uncle of her husband. It was submitted that the applicant had access to the house which she utilized to gain access to the co-accused to loot the house. It was further contended that the applicant had procured a drill machine in the morning of 18th August, 2013 to break into the house as well as to break the locks of the Almirah where the jewelry was kept.

While noting that the conduct of the applicant had been satisfactory in the last year, the Court observed that, "In the case at hand, though the applicant has not undergone 50 per cent of the minimum term of imprisonment, since the charge is one for murder also, nevertheless delay is a fact that ought not to be overlooked. The trial is far from conclusion despite the lapse of nine years. The applicant has remained in custody for almost eight years."

The bail application was allowed.