BAIL APPLN. 901/2026 Page 1 of 2 pages $~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 21.04.2026 + BAIL APPLN. 901/2026 PRASHANT .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Sunil Kumar Tiwari, Advocate versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through: Mr. Hemant Mehla, APP for State with Inspector Ghanshyam CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA J U D G M E N T (ORAL) 1. The accused/applicant seeks regular bail in case FIR No. 122/2024 of Police Station I.P. Estate, Delhi for offence under Section 302/148/149/120B/34 IPC and Section 25/27 Arms Act. 2. In furtherance of last order, status report was filed. I have heard learned counsel for accused/applicant and learned APP for State assisted by IO/Inspector Ghanshyam. 3. Broadly speaking, prosecution case is as follows. On the fateful day at about 07:00pm, when the accused/applicant went to meet his girlfriend, he was assaulted by brother of his girlfriend to such an extent that he had to be admitted in the hospital with serious injuries. Thereafter, on the same day at GIRISH KATHPALIA Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI, 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec455 69af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi, serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570 996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA Date: 2026.04.21 05:44:33 -07'00' Digitally Signed By:RAHUL YADAV Signing Date:21.04.2026 18:19:26 Signature Not Verified BAIL APPLN. 901/2026 Page 2 of 2 pages about 10:00pm, few persons residing in the neighbourhood of the accused/applicant assaulted the deceased to death. The deceased had no relation with the girlfriend of the accused/applicant according to prosecution. But prosecution alleges that the assault on the deceased occurred because the deceased resided in the same vicinity where girlfriend of the accused/applicant resided, so it is the accused/applicant who incited his neighbours to attack the deceased. 4. Learned counsel for accused/applicant submits that there is no evidence against the accused/applicant for which he should be kept behind the bars. 5. Learned APP for State submits that one of the witnesses of the assault alleged that the accused/applicant also was a member of the aggressor group. But the IO is unable to disclose name of that witness. 6. Keeping in mind the above circumstances, I find no reason to further deprive liberty to the accused/applicant. Therefore, the bail application is allowed and accused/applicant is directed to be released on bail subject to his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. 7. A copy of this order be immediately transmitted to the concerned Jail Superintendent for informing the accused/applicant. GIRISH KATHPALIA (JUDGE) APRIL 21, 2026/as GIRISH KATHPALIA Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI, 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec45569a f3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi, serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d1557099 6b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA Date: 2026.04.21 05:44:22 -07'00' By:RAHUL YADAV Signing Date:21.04.2026 18:19:26