Rohit Kumar @ Sagar v. The State Of NCT Of Delhi
$~9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 780/2026 ROHIT KUMAR @ SAGAR .....Applicant Through:
Mr. Nazim Salam, Mr. Aman Akhtar, Mr. Shoaib Ikram and Mr.
Aryan Mavi, Advs.
versus THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through:
Mr. Raghuinder Verma, APP for the State with Ms. Upasna Bakshi and Ms. Divya Bakshi, Advs.
alongwith Insp. Faizan Ghani, SI Pankaj Kumar, PS Jyoti Mr. Anuj Kapoor, Adv. (DHCLSC) with Mr. Nandeesh Nanda and Mr.
Shivam Sethi, Advs.
for complainant
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE
O R D E R
% 18.05.2026 1.
By virtue of the present application under Section 483 read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), the applicant seeks regular bail in FIR No.346/2023 registered at PS.: Jyoti Nagar under Sections 302/102B/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC).
2.
As per FIR, upon intimation, the Investigating Officer (IO) reached the spot whereby the victim (now deceased) had already been taken to the Hospital, where, the brother of deceased (complainant), who had witnessed the incident, revealed that a few days before, he saw the The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
accused persons having an altercation with the deceased qua some money which was not retuned by him. Pursuant whereto, the accused persons had threatened to kill the deceased. Subsequently, on the day of incident, the complainant saw one of the co-accused person holding the deceased and another wielding a knife. Since the complainant shouted for help, all of the accused persons fled therefrom.
3.
This Court has heard learned counsels for the applicant and the complainant, as also learned APP for State, who has also handed over the Status Report, which is taken on record.
4.
In this factual backdrop, learned counsel for the applicant has primarily addressed arguments on the basis of alleged inconsistencies in the Statement(s)/ Deposition(s) of the witnesses qua the presence and involvement/ role of the applicant. Going into the evidence itself means that a trial is indeed required. Moreover, as per trite law, the same itself is something which, unless there is a case made out, cannot be gone into by this Court in the present application wherein the applicant is seeking grant of regular bail. This Court is to assess and form an opinion on the basis of the material on record i.e. whether a prima facie case exits disclosing the involvement of the applicant. There is nothing which calls upon this Court to go into the evidence recorded, be it qua the role/ involvement of the applicant or the issue of prior enmity and common intention. 5.
De hors the fact that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 18.05.2023 and six out of twenty-eight witnesses have been examined, it is not in dispute that the CCTV footage shows the presence of the applicant at the time of incident where he is shown holding/ gripping/ securing the deceased whilst the co-accused person stabbed him. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
6.
Thus, taking a cumulative view of the facts and circumstances involved, the present regular bail application is dismissed. 7.
Needless to say, expression of view(s) on the merits, if any, are solely for the purposes of adjudication of the present application and shall have no bearing on the overall case/ trial involved. SAURABH BANERJEE, J.
MAY 18, 2026/rr The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.