[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Delhi High Court
Shubham @ Ritik vs The State Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi on 11 February, 2026
$~5
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 11.02.2026
+ BAIL APPLN. 2481/2025
SHUBHAM @ RITIK .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. K. Z. Khan and Mr. Suresh
Kumar, Advocates.
versus
THE STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for State
with Inspector Braham Prakash,
Inspector Ashok Kumar and SI
Vishnu Singh, PS Badarpur.
CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
J U D G M E N T (ORAL)
1. The accused/applicant seeks regular bail in case FIR No. 536/2022 of
PS Badarpur for offence under Section 302/34 IPC.
2. I have heard learned counsel for accused/applicant and learned APP
assisted by IO/Inspector Braham Prakash.
3. Broadly speaking, prosecution case as flowing out of the FIR
registered on the complaint of nephew of the deceased is as follows. The
first informant is working as a helper in the tent house run by his father. On
18.12.2022, they had installed a tent in connection with betrothal ceremony
BAIL APPLN. 2481/2025 Page 1 of 4 pages
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca,
ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638,
KATHPALIA
postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15
Digitally Signed 570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801
e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
By:NEETU N NAIR Date: 2026.02.11 17:43:17 -08'00'
Signing Date:11.02.2026
17:59:13
of a neighbour, and he was working there. That neighbour also being of the
same community, relatives of the first informant except his paternal uncle
(the deceased) also were the guests. At that time, one Shubham @ Tolu
called up Kohinoor @ Chavanni over phone and there was exchange of
abuses. After that, his cousin Gaurav asked the first informant to call his
paternal uncle (the deceased). After some time, the deceased told him that
Chavanni had been taught a lesson. Thereafter, at about 07:45 pm when all
of them sat for dinner the deceased left the place, stating that he would
return shortly. After some time, the first informant went out to call the
deceased and at that time he saw Chavanni, Prashant and one more boy were
assaulting the deceased; Chavanni was holding a country made pistol while
Prashant and the third boy were carrying knives and were threatening to kill
the deceased. After they stabbed the deceased, father of the first informant
reached and shifted the deceased to hospital. The complainant de facto
stated that he had seen all three assailants earlier also engaged in goondaism
in the same colony and they had killed his paternal uncle to avenge beating
of Chavanni.
4. As against the above backdrop, learned counsel for accused/applicant
contends that since the FIR does not name the accused/applicant, he
deserves to be released on bail. It is also contended that identity of the
accused/applicant is in dispute insofar as name of the accused/applicant is
only Shubham, not Ritik. It is submitted that the accused/applicant was
arrested only on disclosure and was not identified by anyone even from
CCTV footage of the spot.
BAIL APPLN. 2481/2025 Page 2 of 4 pages
GIRISH
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec4556
COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638,
KATHPALIA
postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570
996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801e26fa,
cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Digitally Signed Date: 2026.02.11 17:43:07 -08'00'
By:NEETU N NAIR
Signing Date:11.02.2026
17:59:13
5. Learned APP assisted by IO/Inspector Braham Prakash strongly
opposes the bail application on the ground that in his testimony as PW1, the
first informant has supported the prosecution case and even identified the
accused/applicant as the person who used knife to stab the deceased. It is
also submitted that the CCTV footage was sent to FSL and genuineness of
the footage has been confirmed by the FSL. It is also submitted that the
blood stained knife was recovered at the instance of the accused/applicant
and the FSL confirmed presence of blood of the deceased on the recovered
knife. Even clothes worn by the accused/applicant at the time of the incident
were recovered at his instance, according to prosecution and the CCTV
footage depicts the accused/applicant wearing same clothes. Further, learned
APP also points out antecedents in the form of three more criminal cases
registered against the accused/applicant.
6. As regards antecedents, learned counsel for accused/applicant submits
that out of those three cases, in one case the accused/applicant stands
acquitted while other two are pending in which the accused/applicant has
been admitted to bail.
7. Looking into the seriousness of the offence coupled with the evidence
mentioned above, I do not find it a fit case to release the accused/applicant
on bail. However, since the accused/applicant is in custody with effect from
22.12.2022 and prosecution submits that they need only five dates to
conclude entire prosecution evidence, the learned trial court is requested to
BAIL APPLN. 2481/2025 Page 3 of 4 pages
GIRISH
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
9af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH
COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638,
KATHPALIA
postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570
996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801e26fa,
Digitally Signed cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2026.02.11 17:42:56 -08'00'
By:NEETU N NAIR
Signing Date:11.02.2026
17:59:13
conclude the entire prosecution evidence within two months. Of course, the
defence side also shall not take any adjournment before the trial court.
8. With the above observations and directions to the trial court, at this
stage the bail application is dismissed. Copy of this order be sent to the
learned trial court.
9. Copy of this order be sent to the concerned Jail Superintendent for
being conveyed to the accused/applicant.
10. At this stage, it is informed by both sides that date before the trial
court is 30.03.2026. That being so, the learned trial court is requested to
prepone the date of trial according to its calendar and the period of two
months to conclude prosecution evidence shall be counted from the said
preponed date.
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
GIRISH 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afe
c45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca,
ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638,
KATHPALIA
postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d1
5570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff8
01e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2026.02.11 17:42:41 -08'00'
GIRISH KATHPALIA
(JUDGE)
FEBRUARY 11, 2026/dr
BAIL APPLN. 2481/2025 Page 4 of 4 pages
