ROHIT@MOHIT@SNIPER (IN JC) vs THE STATE(NCT OF DELHI) THROUGH SHO

Judgment text excerpt

$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 11.03.2026 + BAIL APPLN. 490/2025 ROHIT@MOHIT@SNIPER (IN JC) .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Shyam Manohar, Advocate. versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) THROUGH SHO .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP for State with SI Deepak Kumar. CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA J U D G M E N T (ORAL) 1. The accused/applicant seeks regular bail in case FIR No.03/2024 of PS Jahangir Puri for offence under Section 307/120B/147/148/149/34 IPC and 25 Arms Act. 2. I have heard learned counsel for accused/applicant and learned APP for State assisted by IO/SI Deepak. 3. Broadly speaking, the prosecution case is that the injured/complainant de facto was fired at by the co-accused Suraj @ Rishab, but the complainant de facto saved himself and fled, and the misfired shot hit a child. While BAIL APPLN. 490/2025 Page 1 of 3 pages GIRISH Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI, 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec45569af3962c6 fb4835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - KATHPALIA 7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi, serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570996b40f80 Signature Not Verified cbd2eee60402c487965ff801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA Date: 2026.03.11 14:30:47 -07'00' Digitally Signed By:NEETU N NAIR Signing Date:11.03.2026 15:08:45 fleeing, the complainant de facto was followed by the remaining accused persons, one of whom was the present accused/applicant, carrying knife in his hand. 4. Learned counsel for accused/applicant submits that he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is also contended that co-accused Suraj @ Rishab, who allegedly fired at the complainant de facto has already been released on bail because the complainant de facto and the child who was injured in