Dismissed¶13

Rahul@Ravi v. State NCT of Delhi

Delhi HC18 Mar 2026BAIL APPLN./74/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delhi HC bail order dated 18.03.2026 by Justice Girish Kathpalia in BAIL APPLN. 74/2026: bail application of Rahul @ Ravi in FIR No. 1064/2015, PS Punjabi Bagh (Section 302/34 IPC; 25/27 Arms Act) dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file afresh; FSL (Ballistic) Report produced showing bullet matched weapon recovered from applicant; deceased's dying declaration naming assailant relied on by prosecution; counsel's late-raised Rahul-vs-Ravi name-mismatch claim abandoned after court noted the bail application itself styled the applicant Rahul @ Ravi per the chargesheet.

What did the court decide?

Bail application dismissed as withdrawn; liberty granted to file afresh giving further grounds. ¶13

Rahul@Ravi Vs State NCT of Delhi — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Delhi HC (2026)

¶1

$~8

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

BAIL APPLN. 74/2026 RAHUL@RAVI .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Dolly Sharma, Advocate.

¶4

versus STATE NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for State with Inspector Dinesh Kumar, PS Punjabi Bagh.

¶5

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

¶6

O R D E R % 18.03.2026

¶7

The accused/applicant seeks regular bail in case FIR No. 1064/2015 of PS Punjabi Bagh for offence under Section 302/34 IPC and 25/27 Arms Act.

¶8

In furtherance of last order, learned APP has produced before me the FSL (Ballistic) Report and it is contended that the bullet retrieved from body of the deceased was fired from the same weapon, which was recovered from the accused/applicant. According to prosecution case, before taking his last breath, the deceased told his son that he had been shot at by the accused/applicant.

¶9

On this aspect, learned counsel for accused/applicant submits that today itself it came to her mind that son of the deceased states that the deceased had named Rahul as the assailant whereas the accused/applicant is Ravi and they are two different individuals.

¶10

This is a digitally signed order.

¶11

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 19/03/2026 at 12:30:51

¶12

But on being pointed out that in the bail application, the accused/applicant himself gives his name as Rahul @ Ravi and also that the bail application is completely silent about this claim, learned counsel for accused/applicant seeks permission to withdraw this bail application with liberty to file afresh, giving further grounds. It is also submitted by learned counsel for accused/applicant that she named the applicant as Rahul @ Ravi because chargesheet names him as Rahul @ Ravi.

¶13

As requested, the bail application is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as sought.

¶14

GIRISH KATHPALIA, J

¶15

MARCH 18, 2026/ dr

¶16

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 19/03/2026 at 12:30:51

Rahul@Ravi v. State NCT of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul@Ravi 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

Vipin Gupta @ Rahul Vs the State of NCT of Delhi

Manwar @ Munawar @ Mannu Vs State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Jagdish Kumar Vs State through Central Bureau of Narcotics (Cbn)

Kamruddin @ Kamru Vs State (Nct of Delhi)

Amitabh Poddar Vs State Govt of NCT of Delhi

Laxmikant Vs the State (Govt of NCT of Delhi)