[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Delhi High Court
Gulab vs State on 11 March, 2026
$~3
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 11.03.2026
+ BAIL APPLN. 1366/2024 & CRL.M.(BAIL) 653/2024
GULAB .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Atul Bandhu, Mr. Karan Ahuja
and Mr. Saurabh Agarwal, Advocates.
versus
STATE .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP for State
with Inspector Rakesh Kumar.
Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, DHCLSC
with Mr. Kuldeep Kasana and Mr.
Ahmad Kamaal, Advocates for
complainant.
CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
J U D G M E N T (ORAL)
1. The accused/applicant seeks regular bail during the pendency of trial
in case FIR No. 400/2020 of PS Shahbad Dairy for offence under Section
302/307/34 IPC and 25/27/54/59 Arms Act.
2. In the first call today, none appeared for accused/applicant so the
matter was passed over keeping in mind its old pendency. This matter was
heard for the first time on 23.04.2024 by the predecessor bench and
thereafter, it remained pending before different benches. Finally, along with
179 similar old pending bail applications, it was transferred to this bench
BAIL APPLN. 1366/2024 Page 1 of 4 pages
GIRISH
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec45569af3962c6fb4835d43
5f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638,
KATHPALIA
postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570996b40f80cbd2eee60
Date: 2026.03.11 17:26:32 -07'00'
and today is the first hearing before me.
3. In this second call, I have heard learned counsel for accused/applicant
and learned APP for State assisted by IO/Inspector Rakesh Kumar. I have
also heard learned counsel for complainant de facto.
4. Broadly speaking, circumstances relevant for present purposes are as
follows. The FIR was registered on the basis of statement of injured, who
stated that on the ill fated night, at about 11:50 pm, the accused/applicant
and co-accused Amit @ Mitta apprehended Abhishek, cousin of the injured
complainant de facto. The accused/applicant was carrying a country made
pistol while Amit was carrying a knife. In the presence of the injured, the
accused/applicant fired a shot at Abhishek and co-accused Amit @ Mitta
inflicted knife blows. When the injured tried to save himself by running
away, the accused/applicant fired a shot which hit his shoulder. On being
taken to hospital, Abhishek was declared dead. The injured complainant de
facto was administered medical treatment in the hospital.
5. In the above backdrop, learned counsel for accused/applicant
contends that since trial is going on slow pace, he deserves to be released on
bail. It is also contended that co-accused Ajay, who exhorted the remaining
two accused persons, has been granted bail, so the accused/applicant
deserves same relief. Learned counsel for accused/applicant has also shown
me copies of the ordersheets of the trial court in support of his contention of
slow trial. It is submitted by learned counsel that the accused/applicant is in
BAIL APPLN. 1366/2024 Page 2 of 4 pages
GIRISH
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec45569af3962c6fb4835d435f
97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638,
KATHPALIA
postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570996b40f80cbd2eee604
Date: 2026.03.11 17:26:52 -07'00'
jail for past five and half years.
6. On the other hand, learned APP and learned counsel for complainant
de facto strongly oppose the bail application in view of severity of offence
and apprehension that if released on bail, the accused/applicant would
threaten the eyewitness/injured who is yet to be examined in trial. As
regards the time so far spent by the accused/applicant in jail, it is submitted
that the offence alleged against him is punishable with death. Learned APP
has also referred to the Nominal Rolls reflecting serious charges against the
accused/applicant in jail.
7. As regards the contention of slow pace trial, having examined the
ordersheets of the learned trial court, I am unable to agree with the
submission of learned counsel for accused/applicant. Rather, it appears that
the accused/applicant flooded the trial court with multiple applications
including application for transfer of jail. Not only this, despite pendency of
the present bail application, the accused/applicant filed an interim bail
application also before the trial court, which was dismissed after hearing.
From ordersheets of the trial court, it does not appear that trial is not being
diligently conducted.
8. Apart from delay in trial, no other ground to seek bail has been raised.
9. Considering the above circumstances, especially gravity of offence
where one person was shot dead and the other was shot at, I do not find it a
BAIL APPLN. 1366/2024 Page 3 of 4 pages
GIRISH
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec45569af3962c6fb4835d435f9
7626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638,
KATHPALIA
postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570996b40f80cbd2eee6040
Date: 2026.03.11 17:27:08 -07'00'
fit case to grant bail. Therefore, the bail application and the accompanying
application are dismissed.
10. Copy of this order be sent to the concerned Jail Superintendent for
being conveyed to the accused/applicant.
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: 2026.03.11 17:27:20 -07'00'
GIRISH KATHPALIA
(JUDGE)
MARCH 11, 2026/dr
BAIL APPLN. 1366/2024 Page 4 of 4 pages
