$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010316412026 + BAIL APPLN. 2825/2026 JACKSON .....Petitioner Through: Mr. R. K. Sonkriya, Mr. Naveen Kumar and Mr. Parbhat Yadav, Advocates. versus STATE NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Yudhvir Singh Chauhan, APP for State with Mr. Narendra Kumar, Advocate. S.I. Vinod Kumar, P.S. Kishan Garh. Mr. Akash Deep, Advocate for complainant. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA O R D E R % 30.09.2026 1. The Applicant seeks regular bail in FIR No. 213/2025, registered at P.S. Kishan Garh, Delhi, under Sections 105/238(b)/239/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 [“BNS”]. He has been in custody since 3rd August, 2025. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 1st August, 2025, the deceased Shailesh Kumar Rai entered the premises bearing No. 249, Munirka Village, New Delhi. CCTV footage subsequently collected during investigation is stated to show the Applicant, along with a Child in Conflict with Law [“CCL”], carrying the deceased out of the premises on his back and thereafter taking him on a scooter towards Vasant Vihar. The deceased 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 05/10/2026 at 10:07:46 was left near Purvi Marg Cut without any medical assistance and was subsequently declared brought dead. The prosecution also alleges that the Applicant assaulted the deceased before removing him from the premises. 3. Counsel for the Applicant submits that the medical material which has since come on record substantially alters the complexion of the prosecution case. Attention is drawn to the subsequent opinion of the Senior Resident, Department of Forensic Medicine, rendered after considering the FSL, histopathology and post-mortem reports, which attributes the death to cardiogenic shock as a result of coronary artery disease. It is further pointed out that the chargesheet itself records that the deceased had engaged in sexual activity with one Shikha Khatun @ Rishika, during which his condition deteriorated and he became unconscious. According to the Applicant, the subsequent medical opinion does not establish any connection between the injuries sustained by the deceased and the cause of death. 4. Mr. Yudhvir Singh Chauhan, APP for the State, opposes the application. It is submitted that the deceased was last seen alive entering the premises; the post-mortem examination records several ante-mortem abrasions and contusions caused by blunt-force trauma; and the Applicant’s conduct in carrying an unconscious person away, abandoning him at a secluded place without securing medical assistance, and thereafter leaving Delhi is seriously incriminating. It is, therefore, urged that the nature of the accusation does not warrant release on bail. 5. The subsequent medical opinion now available is a material circumstance in assessing the Applicant’s prayer for bail. While the prosecution initially attributed the death to the injuries allegedly inflicted upon the deceased, the opinion rendered after consideration of the FSL and 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 05/10/2026 at 10:07:46 histopathology reports attributes the death to cardiogenic shock resulting from coronary artery disease. At this stage, therefore, the medical evidence does not prima facie establish a causal link between the injuries found on the deceased and his death. 6. This assumes further significance when the sequence appearing from the prosecution’s own case is noticed. The chargesheet records that the deceased had engaged in sexual activity with Shikha Khatun @ Rishika, during which his condition deteriorated and he became unconscious. The alleged assault is stated to have followed thereafter. Thus, even on the prosecution’s account, the deceased had become unconscious before the alleged assault attributed to the Applicant. 7. The post-mortem does record abrasions and contusions which are stated to be ante-mortem. That circumstance will be a matter for evidence at trial. What is material at this stage, however, is that there is no medical opinion presently shown to the Court which connects those injuries with the death or attributes any role to them in causing the cardiogenic shock. The prosecution will have to establish that link at trial; it cannot, for the purpose of opposing bail, be presumed merely from the presence of injuries. 8. The CCTV footage relied upon by the prosecution is stated to place the Applicant in the subsequent sequence of events and to show him carrying the deceased out of the premises and transporting him elsewhere. That material may have a bearing on the allegations concerning what followed after the deceased became unconscious. It does not, however, answer the more fundamental question concerning the cause of death. On the present record, therefore, the prosecution’s case under Section 105 BNS involves a causal link which remains to be established and tested at trial. 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 05/10/2026 at 10:07:46 9. The investigation is complete and the chargesheet, along with the subsequent material, has been filed. The Applicant has remained in custody for over a year. His Nominal Roll records satisfactory jail conduct and does not disclose any previous criminal involvement. Having regard to the subsequent medical opinion, the stage of the proceedings, and the period already undergone in custody, this Court is of the opinion that further incarceration of the Applicant is not necessary for the purposes of trial. 10. Accordingly, the application is allowed. The Applicant shall be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of INR 25,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty MM, subject to the following conditions: a. The Applicant shall cooperate in any further investigation as and when directed by the concerned IO; b. He shall appear before the Trial Court as and when directed; c. He shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case or tamper with the evidence of the case, in any manner whatsoever; d. He shall, upon his release, give his mobile number to the concerned IO/SHO and shall keep his mobile phone switched on at all times; e. He shall provide the address where he would be residing after his release and shall not change the address without informing the concerned IO/ SHO; f. He shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Trial Court. 11. In the event of there being any FIR/DD entry/complaint lodged against the Applicant, it would be open to the State to seek redressal by 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 05/10/2026 at 10:07:46 filing an application seeking cancellation of bail. 12. It is clarified that any observations made in the present order are for the purpose of deciding the present bail application and should not influence the outcome of the trial and also not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 13. The bail application is disposed of in the above terms. SANJEEV NARULA, J SEPTEMBER 30, 2026/hc 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 05/10/2026 at 10:07:46