Shehzad @Karo v. The State (NCT Of Delhi)

$~8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 10.03.2026 + BAIL APPLN. 715/2026, CRL.M.A. 5551/2026 & CRL.M.A. 5550/2026 SHEHZAD @KARO .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Manohar Naagar and Mr. Akhil Gusain, Advocates versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through:

Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP for the State with SI Abhay Bhati CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA J U D G M E N T (ORAL) 1.

The accused/applicant seeks regular bail in case FIR No.580/2023 of Police Station Madhu Vihar for offence under Section 392/394/397/34 IPC. 2.

I have heard learned counsel for accused/applicant and learned APP for the State assisted by IO/SI Abhay Bhati.

3.

Broadly speaking, the prosecution case is that the complainant de facto met the present accused/applicant, who pretended as if he had been hit by a TSR in front of Max Hospital. When the complainant de facto got down from his car to help the accused/applicant, two boys standing nearby came on a motorcycle and after snatching the gold chain worn by the Page 1 of 3 pages 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec455 69af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi, serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570 996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA Date: 2026.03.10 17:20:31 -07'00'

complainant de facto, fled away. It is alleged that the accused/applicant also brandished a knife.

4.

It is contended by learned counsel for accused/applicant that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated. It is also contended that the accused/applicant was not named in the FIR. Further, it is submitted by learned counsel that complainant de facto has already been examined during trial, so there is no scope of the accused/applicant trying to influence anyone.

5.

Learned APP opposes the bail application on the ground that the seriousness of offence cannot be ignored.

6.

In response to a specific query, it is stated by the IO that according to the admitted position, the accused/applicant was not known to the complainant de facto and the former was not arrested from the spot, but no test identification proceedings were carried out. The accused/applicant is in custody since 09.11.2023 and no public witness remains to be examined, as per IO.

7.

Considering the above circumstances, I do not find any reason to deprive further 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 the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. 8.

A copy of this order be immediately transmitted to the concerned Jail Page 2 of 3 pages 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec4 5569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi, serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d155 70996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801e26 fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA Date: 2026.03.10 17:20:21 -07'00'

Superintendent for informing the accused/applicant. 9.

Of course, nothing observed in this order shall be read to the prejudice of either side at the final stage of the trial. 10.

Pending applications also stand disposed of.

2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4af ec45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacc a, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi, serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d 15570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965f f801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA Date: 2026.03.10 17:20:08 -07'00'

GIRISH KATHPALIA (JUDGE) MARCH 10, 2026 'rs'

Page 3 of 3 pages