Delhi HC grants bail to child in conflict with law in murder case

New Delhi, Jan 23 (PTI) The Delhi High Court has released on bail a "child in conflict with law" who was held in a children's home in relation to a murder case.

Justice Anish Dayal observed that it would not be prudent to continue to keep the "child in conflict with law" (CCL) -- who was 16 years old at the time of arrest -- in custody indefinitely considering three years have already passed and the trial would take time to conclude.

The judge further noted that the institutional conduct of the CCL, who sought bail, was “observed as good” and he has completed plumbing and English courses in the institution as well as attended non-formal education classes and participated in hair-cutting classes.

“In the same spirit, it would not be prudent to continue his detention even though the trial is expected to take some time to conclude,” said the court in a recent order.

“In light of the above and that the trial in the matter is likely to take some time and it would not be prudent to keep the petitioner behind bars for an indefinite period, this Court finds it to be a fit case for grant of bail to the petitioner,” the court said.

The FIR was registered in 2018 after a male body cut in two pieces was found at Vivek Vihar Railway Station. The body was subsequently identified to be of a 19-year-old boy and the post mortem concluded the cause of death as hemorrhagic shock as a result of injuries produced by a sharp-edged weapon.

The court directed the release of the petitioner on a personal bond of Rs 25,000 with one surety of the like amount subject to certain conditions, including not indulging in any criminal activity and appearing before the court concerned whenever required.

"This court notes the fact that the petitioner was a CCL who was 16 years at the time of the alleged offence and has been held in a child home for the last three years and that the Nominal Roll does not indicate any previous involvement," the court stated.

“Taking into account these facts and circumstances as also the fact that four witnesses have already been examined and the others are merely formal witnesses since there was no eyewitness to the incident, as also the fact that the name of the petitioner cropped up only in disclosure of (co-accused)... it would not be prudent to continue to keep the juvenile in custody considering that three years have already gone by and the trial has still a long way to go before completion,” said the court.

The prosecution argued that bail should not be granted since the petitioner was involved in a heinous case. PTI ADS RHL