Ranveer @ Khab Sahab v. State Of NCT Of Delhi
$~23 *
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ BAIL APPLN. 4032/2025 RANVEER @ KHAB SAHAB .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Deepanshu Goswami, Ms. Kirti Chauhan, Ms.
Kanika and Ms.
Himanshi Goswami, Advocates.
versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through:
Mr. Ajay Vikram Singh, APP for State with Inspr. Yogender Kumar, PS Sultanpuri.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJAN
O R D E R
% 19.11.2025 1.
The present application has been filed on behalf of applicant under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 seeking regular bail in connection with FIR No. 1072/2023, under Sections 302/303/341/34 IPC and Sections 25/27 of Arms Act registered at PS-Sultan Puri.
2.
The case of the prosecution is that one Vinod was inflicted injury by the accused persons and he was rushed to Sanjay Gandhi Hospital, Mongolpuri, where he was declared brought dead. 3.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that case of the prosecution hinges on the eye witness account of two eyewitnesses cited by the prosecution, namely Vijay (PW-6) and Nanak Chand (PW-12).
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
4.
He submits that both the said eye-witnesses have been examined and their respective testimonies recorded. The said witnesses have not identified the accused persons who inflicted fatal injuries on the deceased Vinod. 5.
Learned APP appearing on behalf of State has shown testimonies of PW-6 and PW-12 to the Court and fairly concedes that none of the said eyewitnesses have supported the case of the prosecution. 6.
Perusal of the testimonies of two eye-witnesses also show that the witnesses were declared hostile and were cross-examined by the learned APP and even in their cross-examination nothing material could be elicited against the accused persons.
7.
It is also not in dispute that petitioner does not have any previous involvement.
8.
On a pointed query posed by the Court as to whether there are any other material witnesses in the present case, learned APP, on instructions from the IO, who is present in Court, submits that other witnesses are all hearsay witnesses.
9.
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is of the view that the applicant/petitioner has made out a case for grant of regular bail. Accordingly, the applicant/petitioner is admitted on regular bail subject to his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court/JMFC/Duty JM, further subject to the following conditions: a. Petitioner shall appear before the Court as and when the matter is taken up for hearing.
b. Petitioner shall provide mobile number to the IO concerned which shall be kept in working condition at all times and he The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
shall not change the mobile number without prior intimation to the Investigating Officer concerned.
10.
It is clarified that the observations made herein above are only for the limited purpose of deciding the present bail application and the same shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on merits of the case. 11.
The application is disposed of.
12.
Copy of the order be forwarded to the concerned Jail Superintendent for necessary compliance.
13.
Order dasti under signatures of the Court Master. VIKAS MAHAJAN, J NOVEMBER 19, 2025/jg The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.