Regular bail application under Section 483 BNSS by an accused in an Uber driver's murder case based on circumstantial evidence. The court held recoveries of cab keys and mobile phone could not be disbelieved for lack of public witness and noted involvement in two more cases including a murder, and dismissed the bail application.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~10
JUNAID .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Kush Sharma, Mr. Nischaya Nigam and Mr. Vagmi Singh, Advocates versus STATE NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Aman Usman, APP for the State with Neeraj Kumar, PS Anand Parbat
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA
O R D E R % 18.03.2025 1. By this order, I propose to decide the bail application filed on behalf of petitioner/accused under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
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 24/03/2025 at 14:29:26
Additional PP submits that prosecution is strongly relying upon the recovery of stolen mobile phone, through which the accused had booked the cab as also the recovery of keys of the cab of victim from the accused. It is submitted that the testimonies of police officials cannot be discarded merely on the ground that there is no public witness of recovery. It is further submitted that following the same modus-operandi , accused committed another murder on the same day and is facing trial in case FIR No. 0024/2022 under Section 392/302/34 IPC, PS Bharat Nagar. He is also stated to be involved in another case bearing FIR No. 0109/2021, under Section 392/397/411/34 IPC, PS Anand Parbat. It is argued that the allegations qua the present petitioner are grave and serious in nature, and therefore, he does deserve the grant of liberty of bail.
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 24/03/2025 at 14:29:26
mobile No. 9811315641, which was found registered in the name of one Pradeep and this number was being used by his son Akash @ Akku (accused). It was found that to book the taxi, the SIM of lost mobile No. 8851202984 was used in the mobile phone belonging to accused Akash @ Akku. Accordingly, accused Akash @ Akku and the present petitioner were arrested on 08.01.2022. Later on, one another associate, who is a CCL, was also apprehended on 13.01.2022.
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 24/03/2025 at 14:29:26
RAVINDER DUDEJA, J.
MARCH 18, 2025
RM
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 24/03/2025 at 14:29:26
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a bail application should be granted in a circumstantial-evidence murder-robbery case where the accused has been in custody over three years and other recoveries link him to the crime.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Junaid
State NCT of Delhi
Ravinder Dudeja
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
