Young lawyer booked for shopkeeper's death after 'fight over cigarettes' gets bail from Delhi Court [Read Order]

A man’s “commitment” towards his legal education among other things has prompted a Delhi court to grant him bail in a case where he was allegedly involved in a scuffle with a septuagenarian shop-owner over purchase of cigarettes. The shop owner had collapsed and died after being reportedly pushed by the man and his friend..Additional Sessions Judge Vishal Gogne noted that the prima facie cause of death, as opined by the competent doctor, was found to be a coronary artery disease - with arterial blockages to the extent of 80-90%.“The applicant is evidently a person with societal roots and educational commitment, as reflected from his continued legal education,” the judge observed..A case under Section 304 (causing death by negligence) and Section 34 (common intention) of the Indian Penal Code was registered following the death of the 75-year-old man. The applicant was stated to be in custody since June 26, 2021.It came on court’s record that the old man was running a small roadside shop where he was selling cigarettes. On the given day, he was stated to have been pushed by the applicant and a co-accused following which he collapsed and died..The counsel for the applicant pressed for his release on bail on the ground that the post-mortem report had established the cause of death as coronary artery disease with blockages in the arteries to the extent of 90%. They also argued that one of the reasons of the death was the victim’s old age.It was submitted by the defence counsel that the victim and the applicant settled their dispute if the statement of the eye-witness was to be believed.The applicant was stated to be a young lawyer with just one year of practice who had secured a LLM seat at a private university. His counsel also stated that he was not going to run away from the investigation and trial..The Additional Public Prosecutor for the State opposed the bail stating the eye-witness statement showed that the old man was pushed and even if it was to be believed that he had died of a heart ailment, the condition was “precipitated” upon him after being pushed by the applicant. According to the prosecutor, the co-accused was yet to be apprehended..The order underlined that while the question of applicability of the appropriate penal provision, if any, was subject to the finalisation of the police’s chargesheet and a subsequent consideration by the court, it did weigh with the court in favourably considering the prayer for release of the applicant on bail that, first, “apparently taking note of the nature of the altercation and the advanced age of the victim as well as the act of pushing (distinct from physical blows), a FIR has been registered under Section 304 IPC and not under Section 302 IPC.”Secondly, it noted that prima facie cause of death, opined by the competent doctor, was coronary artery disease. “The co-accused remaining to be arrested does not have any bearing on the question of liberty to the present applicant. Police custody of the present applicant having initially been obtained by the investigating officer for one day, the applicant is since in judicial custody and evidently not required for purpose of investigation,” it added.The court held, “Thus, upon a composite reflection upon the nature of the incident, the more than reasonable probability of the applicant not absconding and the cause of death reflected in the medical documents, the court deems it fit that the presumption of innocence is better served by admitting the applicant to liberty.”The applicant was, as a result, granted bail on furnishing of personal bond and a surety bond in the sum of ₹50,000 each.“The surety shall be a local resident of Delhi. The accused shall inform the SHO/IO regarding any change in his present residential address and mobile phone number. The accused shall not contact, influence or coerce any witness in the present case,” directed the court.Advocates Dinesh Mudgil, N C Sharma and Rajesh Kaushik represented the applicant. Advocate Yogendra Adari appeared for the State.