Rejection of anticipatory bail plea for Sushil Kumar

Rejection of anticipatory bail plea for Sushil Kumar

The Hon’ble Delhi High Court, in its recent judgment, has rejected an anticipatory bail plea concerning the Chhatrasal stadium murder case in which famous wrestler Sushil Kumar was accused.

Alleged facts:

The incident had taken place on 4th May in the Chhatrasal stadium. According to the investigation led so far and the statements were given by the eye-witnesses, Sushil Kumar, along with his friends had abducted Sagar Rana, a twenty-three years old trainee in the wrestling field from his home in Model Town to take revenge on him for certain actions of his which they did not like. The victim had been assaulted to death by Sushil Kumar and the co-accused Ajay, Prince Dalal, Sonu, Sagar, Amit, and others. 

After the incident, the accused persons could not be found for interrogation by the police for a very long time. A reward of one lakh rupees had been announced for anyone who could provide any lead for the arrest of Sushil Kumar and a reward of fifty thousand rupees was announced for anyone who could provide the same for the co-accused, Ajay. This had been announced by the Delhi Police. After the prime suspects could finally be arrested, a charge sheet was prepared in which the champion wrestler was accused of offenses namely attempt to culpable homicide under section 308 as well as murder under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 along with many other minor charges such as assault, battery, and wrongful confinement. 

Court proceedings:

The wrestler has been represented by learned counsel, senior advocate Mr. Sidhharth Luthra while the public prosecutor is advocate Mr. Atul Srivastava. Initially, a plea had been filed in the Hon’ble High Court by the counsel representing Sushil Kumar, claiming that the probe against him has been biased and that till the investigation is successful in finding conclusive evidence of his client is guilty, the court should not allow the police to take him under judicial custody even for primary interrogation as that will amount to harassment of his client. The fact that the accused is a champion wrestler has also been highlighted by the defense counsel to seek special consideration on the case. 

The public prosecutor has pleaded that the application is immediately dismissed for want of cause for action. The economic or social status of the accused has been stated to be irrelevant in the petition and the fact that the witnesses and proofs gathered so far have been against the accused should not be undermined. Primary interrogation is the first step that might ease the entire process of prosecution and therefore granting bail should not be a feasible option. 

The Hon’ble court, under Hon’ble Additional Sessions Judge, Hon’ble Justice Jagdish Kumar has observed that the offences which have been allegedly labelled against the accused are serious and therefore, fall under the category of non-bailable offences. 

Moreover, the fact that the accused and the co-accused have been fleeing after the incident had taken place is another point to note. Under such circumstances, it is the court’s responsibility to co-operate with the police in solving the case. Therefore, the plea for anticipatory bail has been rejected. It has also been said that the proofs and shreds of evidence collected so far are yet to be examined and the final hearings are yet to begin. 

Hence, at the moment the Hon’ble court will not give a statement that tarnishes the reputation of the accused and will advise the media to comply with this policy as well.

Team @Law Times Journal
Hello. We are team members of Law Times Journal. Editorial members at Law Times Journal is a team of writers led by Vedanta Yadav. Want to become a writer at Law Times Journal? Send your current work/resume with title "Resume-Editor" at