[Cites 7, Cited by 0]
Delhi High Court
Rohit@Mohit@Sniper (In Jc) vs The State(Nct Of Delhi) Through Sho on 11 March, 2026
$~6
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 11.03.2026
+ BAIL APPLN. 490/2025
ROHIT@MOHIT@SNIPER (IN JC) .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Shyam Manohar, Advocate.
versus
THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) THROUGH SHO .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP for State
with SI Deepak Kumar.
CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
J U D G M E N T (ORAL)
1. The accused/applicant seeks regular bail in case FIR No.03/2024 of
PS Jahangir Puri for offence under Section 307/120B/147/148/149/34 IPC
and 25 Arms Act.
2. I have heard learned counsel for accused/applicant and learned APP
for State assisted by IO/SI Deepak.
3. Broadly speaking, the prosecution case is that the injured/complainant
de facto was fired at by the co-accused Suraj @ Rishab, but the complainant
de facto saved himself and fled, and the misfired shot hit a child. While
BAIL APPLN. 490/2025 Page 1 of 3 pages
GIRISH
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec45569af3962c6
fb4835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID -
KATHPALIA
7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570996b40f80
Date: 2026.03.11 14:30:47 -07'00'
fleeing, the complainant de facto was followed by the remaining accused
persons, one of whom was the present accused/applicant, carrying knife in
his hand.
4. Learned counsel for accused/applicant submits that he has been
falsely implicated in this case. It is also contended that co-accused Suraj @
Rishab, who allegedly fired at the complainant de facto has already been
released on bail because the complainant de facto and the child who was
injured in the incident did not identify him.
5. Learned APP for State fairly admits that both the complainant de
facto as well as the injured child did not support prosecution case.
6. It is also strange to note that in the initial statement, which led to
registration of the FIR, the complainant de facto specifically named the
assailants, but did not name the present accused/applicant. It is only
subsequently in supplementary statement that he added names of the present
accused/applicant, one Sahil, one Meet @ Golu also as assailants and further
added that they were accompanied with 2-3 more persons, who were
carrying knife in their hands.
7. Considering the above circumstances, I find no reason to further
deprive liberty to the accused/applicant. Therefore, the bail application is
allowed and accused/applicant is directed to be released on bail subject to
his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one surety in
BAIL APPLN. 490/2025 Page 2 of 3 pages
GIRISH
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec45569af3962c6fb48
35d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638,
KATHPALIA
postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570996b40f80cbd2
eee60402c487965ff801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.
8. A copy of this order be immediately transmitted to the concerned Jail
Superintendent for informing the accused/applicant.
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
GIRISH 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec
45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca,
ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638,
KATHPALIA
postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15
570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801
e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2026.03.11 14:31:19 -07'00'
GIRISH KATHPALIA
(JUDGE)
MARCH 11, 2026/ry
BAIL APPLN. 490/2025 Page 3 of 3 pages
