Dismissed¶23

Gaurav @ Golu v. the State Gnct of Delhi

Delhi HC15 Jul 2025BAIL APPLN./1013/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail denied; Section 483 BNSS 2023 bail application; FIR NO.0390/2024; Sections 118(1)/126(2)/3(5) BNS 2023; PS Budh Vihar; dying declaration reliability deferred to trial; eye-witness Aakash statement; CCTV footage corroboration; CDR mobile location; risk of threatening/influencing witnesses; knife injuries to thigh; death of victim Rahul @ Haddi at LNJP Hospital on 02.11.2024; two co-accused and three JCLs; charge-sheet filed; trial at initial stage; High Court of Delhi; Ravinder Dudeja, J.; decision dated 15.07.2025; bail application dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The authenticity and genuineness of the dying declarations is to be tested during the trial; no finding can be returned at this (bail) stage. ¶22

Gaurav @ Golu Vs the State Gnct of Delhi — Bail and Remand | Delhi HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶23

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner Gaurav @ Golu, accused in FIR NO.0390/2024, is entitled to grant of bail under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023. +1 more

¶10

Court's answer

The case does not rest simply on the dying declarations but also on the statement of alleged eye-witness Aakash, which cannot be discarded at this stage; there is further CCTV footage evidence showing the presence of the petitioner, other co-accused and CCLs at the spot, and as per the status report the CDR of the petitioner's mobile phone confirms his location at the place of incidence.

¶22

Ratio / Principle

The authenticity and genuineness of the dying declarations is to be tested during the trial; no finding can be returned at this (bail) stage.

¶22

Key takeaways

With the case at an initial stage of trial, material witnesses yet to be examined, no extraordinary delay in conduct of trial, and the possibility that the petitioner upon release may threaten or influence witnesses unable to be ruled out, considering the entire facts and circumstances and the nature and gravity of allegations, this is not a fit case for grant of bail to the petitioner at this stage.ratio¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Ravinder Dudeja, J.) — Bail application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 by Gaurav @ Golu in FIR NO.0390/2024 (Sections 118(1)/126(2)/3(5) BNS 2023, PS Budh Vihar) DISMISSED. Held: (i) authenticity and genuineness of the dying declarations is to be tested at trial and no finding can be returned at the bail stage; (ii) the case rests not only on the dying declarations but also on the eye-witness statement of Aakash, CCTV footage placing the petitioner, co-accused and CCLs at the spot, and CDR location data; (iii) with trial at an initial stage, material witnesses unexamined, no extraordinary delay, and a real possibility of the accused threatening or influencing witnesses, the nature and gravity of the allegations made this unfit for bail. Petitioner was said to be unnamed in the FIR with clean antecedents; the APP opposed, alleging the applicant with two co-accused and three JCLs inflicted knife injuries causing the victim's death.

¶1

$~10

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- BAIL APPLN. 1013/2025 GAURAV @ GOLU .....Petitioner

¶4

Through: appearance not given.

¶5

versus

¶6

THE STATE GNCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Ms. Shubhi Gupta, APP for the State

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

¶9

O R D E R % 15.07.2025

¶10

This is an application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 filed on behalf of the petitioner for grant of bail in case FIR NO.0390/2024 under Section 118(1)/126(2)/3(5) BNS 2023 registered at PS-Budh Vihar.

¶11

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the name of the petitioner is neither mentioned in the FIR nor he was indulged in the alleged crime. He is neither seen in the CCTV footage quarreling with anyone nor indulging in any activities. He is an eighteen years old boy with clean antecedents. The investigation is complete, charge-sheet has already been filed and he is no more required for the purpose of any investigation. Recording of evidence is yet not started, trial would take a long time to conclude and keeping the petitioner in custody would not serve any fruitful purpose.

¶12

The bail application has been vehemently opposed by the learned APP submitting that the applicant along with two other co-accused and three JCLs caused knife injuries to the victim in his thigh resulting in his death.

¶13

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 17/07/2025 at 11:41:37

¶14

She further states that the case is based on direct evidence as also the dying declaration made by the victim implicating the petitioner, co-accused and the three JCLs. She states that the allegation are grave and serious in nature and, therefore, petitioner is not entitled for grant of bail.

¶15

The FIR has been registered on the statement of the victim himself wherein he stated that in the night of 31.10.2024, he had some altercation with Ombir at Budh Bazaar Road. On 01.01.2024 at about 8:30 PM, when he reached near his office, Ombir along with his two associates intercepted him and started beating him with punches and stabbed him 2/3 times at the back side of his right thigh with some sharp object.

¶16

Victim Rahul @ Haddi expired on 02.11.2024 while under-treatment at LNJP Hospital. During investigation, police also recorded the statement of alleged eye-witness Aakash wherein he stated that 5-6 boys namely Ombir, his nephew Rohit, Sohit and his relative Gaurav and Ajit surrounded the victim and gave him fist blows and punches. Rahul @ Haddi was caught by Rohit and Sohit and Ajit gave blows with knife/sharp edged weapon on thighs of Rahul. Simultaneously, he was also given leg and fist blows by the present petitioner and also by Ombir and his son Gulshan.

¶17

During investigation, police also recorded the statement of the father of the victim. According to him, while he was shifting his son Rahul to LNJP Hospital in the ambulance, Rahul informed him that on 31.10.2024, he had a quarrel with nephew and relatives of Ombir and during the said quarrel he had slapped Rohit. On 01.11.2024, Ombir, his son Gulshan, his nephew Rohit, Sohit, Gaurav and Ajit gave him fist blows and Ajit gave him blows with a sharp edged weapon/Knife causing him injuries.

¶18

The learned counsel for petitioner submits that the alleged dying

¶19

This is a digitally signed order.

¶20

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 17/07/2025 at 11:41:37

¶21

declarations do not inspire confidence inasmuch as there are deviations in both the dying declarations.

¶22

Be that as it may, the authenticity and genuineness of the dying declarations is to be tested during the trial and no finding can be returned at this stage. Moreover, the case is not based simply on the basis of dying declarations but also on the basis of the statement of alleged eye-witness Aakash. His statement cannot be discarded at this stage. There is also evidence in the shape of CCTV footage showing the presence of the present petitioner and the other co-accused and CCLs at the spot of incident. As per status report CDR of the petitioner’s mobile phone also confirms his location on the place of incidence.

¶23

The case is still at an initial stage of trial, material witnesses are yet not examined, there is no extraordinary delay in the conduct of trial. Possibility that upon being released on bail, the petitioner may threaten or influence the witnesses cannot be ruled out. Keeping in view the entire facts and circumstances and the nature and gravity of allegations, I am of the view that this is not a fit case for grant of bail to the petitioner/accused at this stage. The present bail application is, therefore, dismissed.

¶24

RAVINDER DUDEJA, J

¶25

JULY 15, 2025 Sky/SK

¶26

This is a digitally signed order.

¶27

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 17/07/2025 at 11:41:37

Gaurav @ Golu v. the State Gnct of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gaurav @ Golu v. the State Gnct of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Piyush Balwani Vs the State Govt. of NCT of Dlehi

Yogesh Gupta Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Shyambabu@Shaymu and Ors. Vs State (Govt of NCT Delhi)

Sujeet Vs the State of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Mohd Akram Vs State of NCT of Delhi

Ravi @ Kishan Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi