Varoon @ Babloo v. State

ORDER

This application has been made by the applicant seeking bail on the ground that no specific role has been assigned to accused/applicant in commission of offence and the co-accused has already been granted bail. However, perusal of record would show that the applicant was one of the main assailants/accused. It was the 'applicant' who along with Shivam, Mukesh and Rajesh sat in front of the house of injured persons and it was the ''applicant' who started giving taunting remarks and making gestures to complainant Kaushalya on whose statement FIR was recorded. When he was forbidden by complainant Kaushalya the applicant along with his three friends went to the house of Kaushalya. He was armed with a knife while

Bail Application No. 1412/2010

others were armed with rod, hockey stick, danda and belts and they indiscriminately started assaulting the family members. The applicant made an attempt to stab Shiv Kumar. This assault of applicant was warded off by Kaushalya on her left hand and in the process she received injuries on the hand. Subsequently, more family members of applicant joined him in the assault. Shiv Kumar, who received injuries at the hands of the applicant, his friends and the family members, died sometime after the quarrel. The case was initially registered under Section 308 IPC and later on converted to Section 304 IPC.

Looking at the role of the applicant, I do not consider that it is a case where no role has been assigned to the applicant. The bail application is hereby dismissed.

December 08, 2010

SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA, J. vn

Bail Application No. 1412/2010 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Reserve: 2nd December, 2010 Date of Order: 8th December, 2010 + Bail Application No. 1412/2010 % 08.12.2010 Varoon @ Babloo ... Petitioner Through Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Jha, Advocate versus STATE ..... Respondent Through Mr. Sunil Sharma, Addl. PP with Insp. Smarjeet Singh, P.S. Sultanpuri JUSTICE SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the reporter or not? 3. Whether judgment should be reported in Digest?