Dheeraj Vs the State of NCT of Delhi

The petitioner seeks for grant of regular bail in connection with FIR No.813/2023 registered at Police Station Nangloi for the offence punishable under Section 302/307/34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act. The said FIR has now been culminated into Sessions Case No. 145/2024.

¶19

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the

¶20

This is a digitally signed order.

¶21

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 13/07/2026 at 15:13:51

¶22

petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. According to him, the petitioner has already suffered sufficient incarceration. He is in jail since 20.10.2023. He points out that there is an inconsistency between the prosecution’s case and the material being placed on record. He points out from the FIR that the time of the incident is 10:31:33 dated 20.10.2023 whereas Rukka was recorded at 2.30 p.m. It is further argued that even according to the case of the prosecution, the brother of the deceased was with the deceased at the time of incident, therefore, there was no reason as to why such undue delay would cause in recording the Rukka . He further submits that the allegation against the petitioner is of causing stab injury by knife, whereas, the Post Mortem Report [PM Report] would belie the said story. He has drawn the attention of the Court to the PM Report which is extracted as under:

¶23

“PM No. 806/2023 on 30.10.2023 at Mortuary, Maulana Azad Mdical College & Lok Nayank Hospital, New Delhi-1 10002. Cause of death is Cerebral damage as a result of ante-mortem injury to the head produced by blunt force/ surface impact. All injuries are ante-mortem in nature, injury No. 6,8,9& 10 were produced by. blunt force impact and are about 7-10 days old in duration, Time since death is about half of a day.

¶24

XXXX XXXXX XXXX

¶25

No definite opinion could be given for injuries caused by weapon provided as — 1. Injuries numbered 1 & 5 mentioned in the PMReport are healed.

¶26

2. Injuries No. 2-4-& 7 mentioned in the PM Report are infected.

¶27

3. Injuries numbered 8-10 mentioned in the Post Mortem Report have been caused by blunt force.”

¶28

He, thus, contends that the prosecution’s story is false and fabricated. There is no possibility of early conclusion of trial. The petitioner undertakes to abide by all terms and conditions to be imposed.

¶29

This is a digitally signed order.

¶30

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 13/07/2026 at 15:13:51

¶31

The submissions are strongly opposed by the learned counsel appearing for the State. The family of the deceased have been informed as stated by the Investigating Officer, however, none appears on their behalf. It is contended by the learned APP that the allegations are serious and the prosecution has enough evidence to establish the guilt of the present petitioner. He has drawn the attention of the Court to the statement of the brother of the deceased and contends that the same is duly corroborated by the other material.

¶32

I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel appearing for both the parties and have perused the record. There are two accused persons who have been arrested in the commission of the aforesaid offence. As per the prosecution, on 20.10.2023, Divansh who is the brother of the deceased namely Charchit, when were proceeding on work, near ganda nala road, the present petitioner and co-accused Shiva allegedly acted with common intention, attacked deceased Charchit with a knife, causing fatal injuries. He also stated that the accused persons also attempted to assault him but he managed to escape.

¶33

The brother – Divansh, who is shown to be the eye-witness, his testimony will have to be recorded and examined by the trial Court during the course of trial. Even the veracity of other material will also have to be looked into during the course of trial.

¶34

The Court, however, finds that in view of the submissions as have been noted herein above, the present is a fit case for grant of regular bail. It be noted that the petitioner is in jail since 20.10.2023. He has already completed more than two and half years’ incarceration. There are twentynine prosecution witnesses and out of them only one has been examined.

¶35

This is a digitally signed order.

¶36

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 13/07/2026 at 15:13:51

¶37

The petitioner undertakes that in case he influences any of the witnesses, the prosecution be granted liberty to take appropriate remedy.

¶38

Bearing in mind the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on regular bail on such conditions as may be imposed by the trial Court. The bail application stands disposed of.

¶39

PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J

¶40

JULY 10, 2026 tr

¶41

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 13/07/2026 at 15:13:51

Dheeraj v. the State of NCT of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dheeraj v. the 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

Arvind Paswan Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Bhushan Sharma Vs the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Rukhsar Vs the State Gnct of Delhi

Manoj Vs State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.

Shri Prateek Kumar Vs State & Anr.

Nitish Kumar Vs State of N.C.T. of Delhi and Others