$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 385/2025 and CRL.M.A. 2761/2025 MOHD SHAIN@ SHAHIN .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Dolly Sharma, Advocate. versus STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Ms. Shubhi Gupta, APP for State. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV O R D E R % 08.07.2026 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 CR.P.C) r/w Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (erstwhile Section 482 Cr.P.C) seeking grant of regular bail in relation to FIR No.131/2019 registered at PS New Friends Colony qua the offence punishable under Section 302/201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case and is innocent. According to her, the prosecution has miserably failed to bring on record enough material to establish the complicity of the applicant. She also contends that the applicant is in jail since 29.06.2019 and has already suffered about 7 years of incarceration. 3. The aforesaid submissions made on behalf of the applicant are 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 13/07/2026 at 16:55:00 strongly opposed by learned APP for the State. She has drawn the attention of the Court to the testimony of PW-1 namely Master ‘M’, who is the son of deceased and PW-3 namely, Mohd. Sultan, who was the neighbour of the deceased and contended that besides other testimonies, the testimony of PW- 1 and PW-3 directly establish the role of the applicant. She also submits that the slippers, which were seized from the house of the deceased, contained a blood stain and on DNA examination, it was found that it matches with the petitioner’s. Therefore, it is contended that the applicant is not entitled for regular bail and the instant application deserves to be rejected. 4. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. If the testimonies of PW-1 and PW-3 coupled with the DNA examination are considered in the right perspective, it would not in and of themselves, at this stage, be sufficient to create a cloud on the applicant, that disentitles him to bail. In any case, the testimony of the witnesses will have to be considered by the Trial Court at the time of rendering its final decision. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has pointed out contradictions in the statements under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. as well as the testimony, which have been recorded before the Trial Court. Besides the aforesaid, it is contended that the slippers were seized from the house of the deceased after three days from the date of incident. 7. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court while considering the long period of incarceration of the applicant, and bearing in mind the fact that out of a total of 35 witnesses, only 6 witnesses have been examined, and the trial is expected to take some time in its completion, the Court deems it appropriate to enlarge the present applicant 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 13/07/2026 at 16:55:00 on regular bail. The Court, therefore, directs for the release of the applicant on regular bail on such conditions as may be imposed by the Trial Court. 8. In view of the aforesaid, the instant application along with the accompanying application stands disposed of. PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J JULY 8, 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 13/07/2026 at 16:55:00