Allowed¶23

Sooraj v. State (Nct of Delhi)

Bail – Regular bail

Delhi HC16 Jul 2025BAIL APPLN./651/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delhi High Court, Bail Appln. 651/2025 decided 16.07.2025 by Dr. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma. Regular bail granted to Sooraj, accused under Sections 302/34 IPC in FIR No. 887/2022 (murder of Sushil Kumar), PS Narela Industrial Area, after the State conceded that the eyewitness/complainant turned hostile and the applicant was not visible in seized CCTV footage. Personal bond Rs 15,000/- with one surety; conditions on travel, address changes, court appearances and witness contact; no opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail granted to the applicant on furnishing personal bond of Rs 15,000/- with one surety of the like amount, subject to conditions imposed by the Court; bail application allowed and disposed of. ¶23

Sooraj Vs State (Nct of Delhi) — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Delhi HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶23

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant (Sooraj) should be granted regular bail in FIR No. 887/2022, PS Narela Industrial Area, for offences under Sections 302/34 IPC.

¶10

Court's answer

As recorded on instructions from the Investigating Officer by the learned APP for the State, the eyewitness/complainant has turned hostile and the applicant was not visible in the CCTV footage seized during investigation; these concessions formed the stated basis for the Court's inclination to grant bail.

¶15

Ratio / Principle

The Court granted regular bail to the applicant on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs 15,000/- with one surety of the like amount, subject to conditions including surrender of passport/no travel abroad without permission, intimation of change of address, regular appearance before the Trial Court, and no contact with the complainant/prosecution witnesses or tampering with evidence.

¶16

Key takeaways

It was clarified that nothing expressed in the order shall tantamount to an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.obiter¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail – Regular bail – Murder (Sections 302/34 IPC, FIR No. 887/2022, PS Narela Industrial Area) – Applicant sought regular bail; the learned APP for the State, on instructions of the IO, conceded that the eyewitness/complainant had turned hostile and that the applicant was not visible in the CCTV footage seized during investigation – Held, in view of the said statement, the Court inclined to grant regular bail on a personal bond of Rs 15,000/- with one surety of the like amount, subject to conditions (no travel abroad without permission / surrender of passport, intimation of change of address/contact details, regular appearance before the Trial Court, no contact with complainant or prosecution witnesses or tampering with evidence) – Bail application allowed and disposed of – Clarified that nothing expressed shall tantamount to an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

¶1

$~8

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- BAIL APPLN. 651/2025

¶4

SOORAJ .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Suraj Prakash Sharma, Advocate.

¶6

versus

¶7

STATE (NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through: Mr. Manoj Pant, APP for the State along with Inspector Sudhir Rathi.

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA

¶9

O R D E R % 16.07.2025

¶10

By way of the present application, the applicant seeks grant of regular bail in FIR bearing no. 887/2022, registered at Police Station Narela Industrial Area, Delhi for the commission of offences under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereafter ' IPC' ).

¶11

Briefly stated, the facts of the present case are that on the intervening night of 25/26.11.2022, an information regarding admission of one Sushil by his wife Sunita was received at Police Station Narela Industrial Area from M.V Hospital and the MLC of the victim was collected. The concerned Investigating Officer (IO) had reached the aforesaid Hospital and had met the wife of the victim, who had informed that her husband is sleeping and the statement would be given later. On 26/27.11.2022, beat staff had informed the IO about the death of Sushil Kumar. At that time, Sunita had informed that her husband was beaten on 25.11.2022, in front of H. No. C-

¶12

This is a digitally signed order.

¶13

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 18/07/2025 at 11:42:45

¶14

321, Phase-I, Metro Vihar and had told that she would give her statement later on. On 27.11.2022,. Sunita had given her statement in which she stated that on 25.11.2022, a quarrel had taken place between Shibu, Sooraj (present applicant), Raj Kumar, Karan and Lucky and all of them had given beatings to her husband by kicks and punches. Resultantly, she had taken her husband to Hospital but unfortunately, he had succumbed to the injuries. On the basis of the statement of Sunita, the MLC of the victim and circumstances narrated above, the present FIR came to be registered and therefore, all the accused persons were arrested.

¶15

The learned counsel appearing for the applicant states that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. 4. In the present case, on instructions from the Investigating Officer (IO), it is stated by the learned APP for the State that the eyewitness/complainant has turned hostile and it is also not disputed that the present applicant was not visible in the CCTV footage, which was seized during investigation.

¶16

Therefore, in view of the above statement made by the learned APP for the State, this Court is inclined to grant regular bail to the applicant herein, on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs 15,000/- with one surety of the like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court/Successor Court/Link Court/Duty Judge concerned on the following terms and conditions:

¶17

i) The applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the concerned Court and if the applicant has a passport, he shall surrender the same to the concerned trial court. ii) In case of change of residential address/contact details, the

¶18

This is a digitally signed order.

¶19

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 18/07/2025 at 11:42:45

¶20

applicant shall promptly inform the same to the concerned Court and IO/SHO concerned.

¶21

iii) The applicant shall appear regularly before the learned Trial Court, unless exempted.

¶22

iv) The applicant shall not communicate with, or come into contact with the complainant or any of the prosecution witnesses, or tamper with the evidence of the case.

¶23

Accordingly, the present bail application stands allowed and is disposed of.

¶24

It is, however, clarified that nothing expressed hereinabove shall tantamount to an expression of opinion on merits of the case.

¶25

The order be uploaded on the website forthwith.

¶26

DR. SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J

¶27

JULY 16, 2025/A

¶28

This is a digitally signed order.

¶29

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 18/07/2025 at 11:42:45

Sooraj v. State (Nct of Delhi)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sooraj v. State (Nct of Delhi)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anwar Khan @ Chacha & Ors. Vs the State NCT of Delhi

Smt. Neeta Vs Shri Pankaj Saragoi

Omvir Alias Romeyo Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Bhupender Singh Vs State (Nct of Delhi)

Kapil Mohan Dubey Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Nagender Singh @ Nagin Vs State (Nct of Delhi)