Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Delhi · body

2024 DAILYLAW 3265 (DEL)

MOHD MUSTAQEEM v. STATE OF NCT DELHI

BAIL APPLN./4824/2024 · 2026-07-20

Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav

body2024

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 4824/2024 MOHD MUSTAQEEM .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajiv Mohan, Ms. Tara Narula, Ms. Shivangi Sharma, Mr. Manish Kashyap and Mr. Hemant, Advocates. versus STATE OF NCT DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Nair, SPP with Mr. Dhruv Pande, Advocate. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV O R D E R % 20.07.2026 CRL.M.A. 24307/2025 (for exemption) 1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. 2. The application stands disposed of. BAIL APPLN. 4824/2024 1. The instant application has been filed on behalf of the applicant under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (erstwhile Section 439 of Cr.P.C) seeking grant of regular bail in relation to FIR No.75/2020 registered at PS Dayalpur qua the offence punishable under Section 147/148/149/436/302/120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). 2. It appears that the earlier bail application filed by the present This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 21/07/2026 at 12:00:43 applicant was dismissed on merits vide order dated 18.12.2023. It is, however, pointed out that thereafter, 22 witnesses have been examined including all eye witnesses. It is, thus, contended that the Court may like to consider the merits of the case and the applicant be granted regular bail. 3. Submissions made on behalf of the application are vehemently opposed by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-State. He contends that the Investigating Officer (IO) is under cross examination and the prosecution evidence has already been completed. 4. Bearing in mind the substantial progress in trial, the Court is not inclined to accept the prayer made in the instant application seeking grant of regular bail and instead deems it appropriate to direct the concerned Trial Court to expedite the cross examination of the IO of the case. 5. Let the IO to remain present before the Trial Court on the date to be fixed by the Trial Court. IO undertakes not to seek any adjournment. 6. Let the cross examination of the IO of the case be completed within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of copy of the order passed today. 7. Let the defence evidence be also expedited by the Trial Court. The applicant also undertakes to render full co-operation. 8. At this stage, the instant application stands rejected. 9. Liberty is, however, granted to the applicant to file a fresh application, in case, the trial is not completed within a further reasonable period of time. PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J JULY 20, 2026 Nc This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 21/07/2026 at 12:00:43