$~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 181/2025 NAUSHAD@CHUHA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Tarun Gautam, Advocate. versus THE STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through: Mr. Ajay Vikram Singh, APP for the State with Inspector Neeraj Kumar, PS Shahdara. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA O R D E R % 03.03.2025 1. Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘B.N.S.S.’) (Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) read with Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. (Section 482 of the ‘CrPC’) has been filed on behalf of the Petitioner, Naushad @ Chuha, for grant of Regular Bail in Case FIR No. 89/2019 under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as ‘IPC’), registered at Police Station Shahdara, Delhi. 2. As per the case of the Prosecution, on 20.04.2019, the Applicant along with the four other co-accused alleged dragged the deceased, Mr. Pramod Kumar Sharma into the bushes and gave him beatings with bricks and blows and looted Rs.5,400/- from him. On account of the beatings, Mr. 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 04/03/2025 at 12:09:29 Pramod Kumar Sharma died. FIR No. 89/2019 under Section 302 of IPC, was registered at Police Station Shahdara, Delhi. 3. It is further submitted that out of a total 22 prosecution witnesses, 15 have already been recorded. The entire case of the Prosecution rests on one eye witness, PW-1/Mr. Anil Singh Jadon, who has been declared hostile. He has failed to support the Prosecution on the main facts. Furthermore, there are contradictions between the statements of PW-1 and the other public witnesses. Further, PW-6/Mr. Shivam Sharma, the other Public witnes has merely identified the body of the deceased person. 4. It is further submitted that the Applicant is in judicial custody since 31.05.2019 and the trial is going to take a long time. There is no likelihood of the Applicant influencing the witnesses or avoiding the process of law. Hence, the prayer is made for grant of Bail. 5. A Status Report has been filed on behalf of the State wherein it has explained the role of the Applicant in giving brick blows to the deceased, while the other co-accused persons held the deceased, and of having robbed him of Rs.5,400/-. 6. Submissions heard and the record perused. 7. All the public witnesses have been recorded and not much support to Prosecution case corroboration has been established by testimonies of PW-1, the sole eye witness, on whose testimony the case of the Prosecution largely rests. The Applicant is in judicial custody since 31.05.2019. Out of 22 witnesses, only 15 have been examined and there is likelihood of the trial taking long in getting concluded. 8. In the Case of State of Rajasthan, Jaipur vs. Balchand alias Baliay, (1977) 4 SCC 308, it was observed that the rule must be Bail except where 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 04/03/2025 at 12:09:29 there are circumstances suggestive of fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like, by the Applicant, who seeks enlargement on bail. 9. In the Case of Praveen Rathore vs. State of Rajasthan and Another, 2023 SCC OnLine 1268, the Court considered the prolonged trial as a material for grant of Bail. 10. Considering the totality of the circumstances and also that co-accused, Ajay Pahari has already been granted Bail by this Court vide Order dated 22.03.2024, the accused is granted Regular Bail, on the following terms and conditions: a) The Petitioner/accused shall furnish a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and one surety of like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. b) The Petitioner/accused shall appear before the Court as and when the matter is taken up for hearing; c) The Petitioner/accused shall provide his mobile number/changed mobile number to the IO concerned which shall be kept in working condition at all times; d) The Petitioner/accused shall not indulge in any criminal activity and shall not communicate or intimidate the witnesses. e) In case the Petitioner/accused changes his residential address, the same shall be intimated to learned Trial Court and to the concerned I.O. 11. The copy of this Order be communicated to the concerned Jail Superintendent as well as to the learned Trial Court. 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 04/03/2025 at 12:09:29 12. The Bail Application is accordingly disposed of. NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J MARCH 3, 2025/RS 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 04/03/2025 at 12:09:29