Vicky v. The Government Of NCT Of Delhi
$~9 & 10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 402/2026 PARVEEN KUMAR .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Kartik Kumar, Mr. Aakash Basoya, Mr. Gaurav Sharma and Mr.
Anil Malik, Advocates versus STATE NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through:
Mr. Sunil Kumar Gautam, APP for State + BAIL APPLN. 1145/2026 & CRL.M.A. 8638/2026 VICKY .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Mohammed Yusuf, Advocate versus THE GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through:
Mr. Sunil Kumar Gautam, APP for State
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN
O R D E R
% 21.04.2026 1.
Both the applicants seek regular bail in case FIR No. 0250/2023 dated 01.03.2023 registered at Police Station Bawana for commission of offence under Section 302/34 IPC.
2.
The aforesaid FIR was registered on the basis of report lodged by one Sagar on 01.03.2023 in which he claimed that his co-worker in the factory i.e. Karan (deceased herein) was surrounded by 3-4 persons and was given BAIL APPLN. 402/2026 & BAIL APPLN. 1145/2026 1 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
repeated stab injuries. He also claimed that he had seen all those assailants and could identify them.
3.
Police was able to apprehend four accused persons, including both the applicants herein.
4.
Trial is already underway and prosecution has examined five witnesses, including the aforesaid solitary eyewitness Sagar. 5.
Copy of his deposition has been placed on record which indicates that he has not supported the case of prosecution as he even denied seeing any such incident. Despite his exhaustive cross-examination conducted by the prosecution with the permission of the Court, he did not utter anything incriminating against any of the accused. Similarly, one another material witness i.e. PW5 Tarun has also not supported the case of prosecution. Brother of deceased has also disowned his previous statement which he had given to the police during investigation.
6.
There are, reportedly, 29 witnesses cited in the charge-sheet and, evidently, there is no likelihood of trial being completed in near future. 7.
Period of incarceration of both the aforesaid applicant is already more than three years. As per the Nominal Rolls received from the Jail Authorities, they do not have any previous involvement. 8.
Keeping in mind the overall facts and circumstances of the case, albeit, without expressing any opinion over the merits of the case, both the aforesaid applicants are directed to be released on bail on their furnishing personal bond and surety bond in sum of Rs. 25,000/- subject to the satisfaction of concerned learned Trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Judicial Magistrate First Class with following conditions: - (i) Surety would be local.
1.
BAIL APPLN. 402/2026 & BAIL APPLN. 1145/2026 2 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
(ii) Applicant shall provide his Mobile Number to the concerned investigating officer and would ensure that such Mobile Number remains active and operational, till the disposal of the aforesaid murder case.
(iii) Applicant shall not try to influence or intimidate any witness or family members of deceased, directly or indirectly. 9.
Applications stand disposed of accordingly.
10.
Any other pending application also stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.
11.
A copy of this order be sent to learned Trial Court and Jail Superintendent for information and compliance. MANOJ JAIN, J APRIL 21, 2026/dr/sy BAIL APPLN. 402/2026 & BAIL APPLN. 1145/2026 3 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.