The judge turned down the prosecution's request for judicial custody of Shyam Sunder and granted him bail. MM Khanna observed: ``On considering the submission and perusal of the case diary, I find no material on record showing any ingredients of conspiracy to commit murder.'' The evidence against the accused are bailable, the judge held.

When Sharma was brought to court, the prosecutor was initially unsure about the sections levelled against Sunder. He said: ``The accused has been charged with criminal conspiracy.'' In reply to his submission, defence counsel, Dinesh Mathur, lashed out at the prosecution. ``How can the prosecution level charges without applying their mind? The arrest of my client is illegal. They have to mention the offence and the grounds of the arrest,'' Mathur said.

After citing various apex court judgements, Mathur questioned the validity of the arrest. ``An arrest without reasonable ground is denying the person's liberty. It is a serious matter,'' Mathur stated. He asked the judge to read the arrest-memo which, according to Mathur, did not mention the sections under which Shyam was charged. The judge then asked SHO Mehrauli to specify the sections.

He admitted the notices sent to Sunder on three different occasions. ``My client was first called on May 10. For the next two days, he was again interrogated for about seven hours,'' Mathur said. He alleged that the police had kept Sunder since yesterday morning and had produced him in court after 30 hours. ``Where is the record to show they had released him?'' Mathur asked, when the prosecution objected.

At this, the prosecution apprised the court that the sections levelled against Sunder were read with murder and more investigation was required. Mathur retorted:``If they require him for investigation, then why are they sending him to judicial custody. I am moving a bail application. Moreover, the charges against my client are bailable.'' The defence had reportedly earlier moved an application at the Mehrauli Police Station which was not accepted.

``The only allegations on record are that Titu had met the accused Shyam Sunder at Manali and had informed him that his nephew had killed a woman in the restaurant at Delhi and Manu Sharma had given him his pistol,'' the judge held. He added:``The record only points to harbouring or concealing a person from the process of law and screening him from the legal punishment and causing the evidence of the commission of the offence to disappear''.