The Delhi High Court has granted bail to a man accused of murder, while criticising the Delhi Police for conducting a “completely botched up investigation” in the case.

Justice Girish Kathpalia questioned the delay in registering the FIR despite information about the unnatural death having been received by the police.

The Court observed that the FIR was registered more than three days after the local police was informed about the incident, while noting that the entire investigation was completed within less than four hours of registration of the FIR.

“This reflects the scant respect that the local police has shown in this case concerning liberty of an individual,” the Court observed.

This was after the investigating officer failed to produce the arrest memo when asked to clarify the circumstances of the accused's arrest.

The Court was hearing a bail plea filed by accused Sachin, who has been in custody since December 8, 2022, in a murder case registered under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per the prosecution's case, Sachin was allegedly involved in an illicit relationship with the deceased's wife. It was alleged that on the night of the incident, the woman sent her sons out of the house, following which she and Sachin allegedly administered alcohol to the deceased and killed him by assaulting him with fists and kicks.

The deceased was subsequently taken to a hospital, where he was declared dead. The hospital informed the local police about the death on December 04, 2022, at around 11 am, through a daily diary entry. However, the FIR was registered only on December 7, 2022, at 8:15 pm.

The Court noted that there was no explanation for the delay in registering the FIR despite the police having been informed that the deceased's body was being shifted to the mortuary, indicating a case of unnatural death.

The Court also questioned the prosecution's reliance on the alleged last-seen circumstance. It noted that Nishant, the witness who allegedly last saw the deceased in the company of the accused, did not know Sachin.

It further noted that despite the said position, no test identification parade was conducted, and that the witness identified the accused for the first time during his testimony before the trial court.

On the forensic evidence, the Court observed that the presence of the deceased's DNA on the ligature allegedly used in the crime could, at most, established the use of the ligature but did not connect it to Sachin.

The Court further noted that all public witnesses had been examined, but only 10 out of the 25 prosecution witnesses were examined by the trial court.

Clarifying that its assessment was limited to the consideration of bail, the Court said the trial court would independently assess the evidence at the final stage.

“Considering the above circumstances, I do not find any reason to deprive further liberty to the accused/applicant,” the Court held.

Accordingly, it allowed the bail plea and directed the accused's release on a personal bond of Rs. 20,000 with one surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the trial court or the Duty Magistrate.

Counsel for Petitioner: Mr. Mohd. Suza Faisal and Mr. Mohd. Kashif, Advocates

Counsel for Respondent: Ms. Manjeet Arya, APP for State