Allowed¶31

Hunny Lakra v. State of NCT of Delhi

Delhi HC8 Jan 2026BAIL APPLN./4244/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail granted; Delhi High Court; Justice Manoj Jain; BAIL APPLN. 4244/2025; FIR No. 694/2023, P.S. Mundka; Hunny Lakra; Sections 304/323/341/506/34 IPC; incident dated 16.09.2023; death of complainant's grand-mother; postmortem cause 'Coronary Artery Disease precipitated by Physical Assault'; all material public witnesses PW-1 to PW-5 failed to identify accused; witnesses adamant despite prosecution cross-examination; APP conceded depositions; custody since 17.09.2023; no other case per Nominal Roll; personal bond Rs. 25,000/- with one surety of like amount; no opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail granted: release on furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety of like amount, subject to satisfaction of learned Trial Court/CMM/Duty Magistrate. ¶31

Hunny Lakra Vs State of NCT of Delhi — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Delhi HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Regular bail granted: release on furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety of like amount, subject to satisfaction of learned Trial Court/CMM/Duty Magistrate.

¶31

Issue for consideration

Whether petitioner Hunny Lakra should be released on regular bail in relation to FIR No. 694/2023, P.S. Mundka.

¶12

Court's answer

Petitioner Hunny Lakra is directed to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety of like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court/CMM/Duty Magistrate, the Court expressly refraining from expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.

¶30

Ratio / Principle

None of the spot witnesses identified the assailants; the material witnesses, even when cross-examined by the prosecution with the Court's permission, maintained that the accused present in Court were not the assailants, and the learned APP for the State did not dispute this deposition.

¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail Application Allowed - Delhi High Court (Manoj Jain, J.), BAIL APPLN. 4244/2025: Regular bail granted to petitioner Hunny Lakra in FIR No. 694/2023, P.S. Mundka. Petitioner and his brother stand charged under Sections 304/323/341/506/34 IPC (co-accused Pradeep charged similarly, except under Section 304 IPC) in a case arising from an incident of 16.09.2023 in which the complainant's grand-mother died; the postmortem attributed death to 'Coronary Artery Disease precipitated by Physical Assault'. All five material public witnesses (PW-1 Prince Gehlawat, PW-2 Neelam, PW-3 Samsher Singh Gahlawat, PW-4 Harsh Lathwal, PW-5 Anita) failed to identify any of the accused persons despite cross-examination by the prosecution, a position not disputed by the learned APP. Petitioner in custody since 17.09.2023 and, per his Nominal Roll, not involved in any other case. Released on personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety of like amount, subject to satisfaction of the Trial Court/CMM/Duty Magistrate; no opinion expressed on the merits.

¶1

$~11

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- BAIL APPLN. 4244/2025

¶4

HUNNY LAKRA

¶5

.....Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal with Mr. Mayank Punid, Advocates.

¶6

versus

¶7

STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

¶8

.....Respondent Through: Mr. Sunil Kumar Gautam, APP with SI Ramesh Kumar.

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

% 08.01.2026

¶12

Petitioner seeks regular bail in FIR No. 694/2023 registered at P.S. Mundka.

¶13

He and his brother have been charged under Sections 304/323/341/506/34 IPC and one more co-accused-Mr. Pradeep has also been charged similarly, except for offence under Section 304 IPC.

¶14

All the material public witnesses have already been examined and learned counsel for petitioner submits that they all i.e. PW-1 Mr. Prince Gehlawat, PW-2 Ms. Neelam, PW-3 Mr. Samsher Singh Gahlawat, PW-4 Mr. Harsh Lathwal and PW-5 Ms. Anita have failed to identify any of the accused persons.

¶15

He also submits that as per the allegations appearing in FIR, the

¶16

BAIL APPLN. 4244/2025

¶17

¶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 09/01/2026 at 11:14:22

¶20

incident had taken place on 16.09.2023 when complainant Mr. Prince Gehlawat was coming back to his home from his office in Inderlok in his Creta car. En route , a Wagon-R car was found parked and, since it was raining that day and the rain water had accumulated on the road, while crossing the parked Wagon R car, some water splashed on the same.

¶21

This resulted in scuffle as the persons sitting in the Wagon R Car chased Creta car of the complainant and detained him and assaulted him. 6. In the meanwhile, one another car also came from behind in which three persons were sitting and the occupants of that car also started beating complainant. 7. On the basis of the telephonic call made by the servant of the complainant, other relatives of the complainant also reached at the spot. 8. During the further scuffle, the complainant and his family members were beaten up and when grand-mother of the complainant, who had also reached the spot, was pushed, she fell down and became unconscious. When she was brought to hospital, she was declared ‘ brought dead’ .

¶22

As per the postmortem report, the cause of death is “Coronary Artery Disease precipitated by Physical Assault”. 10. Fact, however, remains that none of the spot witnesses have identified the assailants. They all, categorically, deposed before the Court that they could identify the assailants if shown to them but in the next breath, when the assailants were shown to them, they claimed that accused present in Court were not those assailants. Despite the fact that they were cross-examined by the prosecution with the permission of the Court, they remained adamant in their stand and reiterated that the accused present in the Court were not those assailants who had caused injuries on the date of the incident.

¶23

BAIL APPLN. 4244/2025

¶24

¶25

This is a digitally signed order.

¶26

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 09/01/2026 at 11:14:22

¶27

Learned APP for the State does not dispute the abovesaid deposition of material witnesses.

¶28

The petitioner is, reportedly, in the custody since 17.09.2023.

¶29

His Nominal Roll also indicates that he is not involved in any other case.

¶30

Keeping in mind the overall facts of the case and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, petitioner-Hunny Lakra, is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in a sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety of like amount subject to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court/CMM/Duty Magistrate.

¶31

The application stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.

¶32

A copy of this Order be immediately sent to the learned Trial Court and Jail Superintendent for information and necessary compliance.

¶33

MANOJ JAIN, J

¶34

JANUARY 8, 2026 /sw/pb

¶35

BAIL APPLN. 4244/2025

¶36

¶37

This is a digitally signed order.

¶38

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 09/01/2026 at 11:14:22

Hunny Lakra v. State of NCT of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hunny Lakra v. State of 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

Nabeel Ahmad & Ors. Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Farjand Ali & Ors. Vs the State of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Beervati Vs State of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Amit Yadav Vs the State ( N.C.T of Delhi ) & Ors.

Rajiv Kumar Jain & Ors. Vs State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Faizal Vs State NCT of Delhi and Anr.