Delhi HC Denies Interim Bail To Murder-Accused For Attending PhD Classes, Says Options Available In Judicial Custody To Pursue Educational Goals

The Delhi High Court yesterday denied prayer of a murder-accused for interim bail to pursue regular PhD classes, noting the gravity of the stated offence and allegations that the complainant had been threatened. “Undoubtedly, every individual has the right to pursue the education but in the present case the petitioner is an accused of a serious offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and has to be dealt accordingly looking into the gravity of offence.” Speaking of other viable options, the court added, “I failed to understand as to why the petitioner has opted for pursuing his PHD from a university which requires to attend the full-time PHD coursework mandatorily despite being in judicial custody while various other options are being available for the persons in judicial custody to pursue their educational goals” It further observed that the situation would have been different if there was a facility of video conferencing for attending the PhD classes, but the same was denied by the University that the accused had applied to. In arriving at the decision, Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar considered that the trial had not commenced and the matter was pending at the stage of arguments on charge. Under these circumstances, it was remarked that interim bail for 3 months would hamper trial. Notably, the petitioner had approached the court seeking interim bail in an FIR registered under Sections 302 (murder) and 307 (attempt to murder) read with Section 34 (common intention) of IPC. He had urged that he needed to attend regular classes for PhD at Gujarat University and had earlier been granted interim bail for 7 days to appear in the entrance exam for PhD (which he cleared). The State, on the other hand, averred that the petitioner had not apprised the Trial Court that he was enrolling for a regular PhD course. It was also contended that the application could be petitioner’s ploy to get out of jail and threaten complainant as well as witnesses. Ms. Rebecca M. John, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Rishikesh Kumar and Mr. Nilanjan Dey, Advocates appeared for petitioner Mr. Raghuinder Verma, APP appeared for State Mr. Varun Bhardwaj, Mr. Pushpender Singh, Mr. Love Dixit and Mr. Rahul Kasana, Advocates appeared for complainant Case Title: Varun v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr.Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1159Click here to read/download judgment

Delhi HC Denies Interim Bail To Murder-Accused For Attending PhD Classes, Says Options Available In Judicial Custody To Pursue Educational Goals

Debby Jain

Tags