logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide
24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 DHC 548 print Preview print Next print
Court : High Court of Delhi
Case No : Bail Appln. No. 3304 of 2026 & CRL.M.A. No. 24700 of 2026
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
Parties : Hunny Versus The State Govt Of NCT Of Delhi
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: Roshan Lal, Advocate. For the Respondent: Hemant Mehla, APP.
Date of Judgment : 13-08-2026
Head Note :-
BNS - Section 109(1)/3(5) -

Comparative Citation:
2026 DHC 6635,
Summary :-
1. Statutes / Acts / Rules Mentioned:
- Section 109(1)/3(5) BNS

2. Catch Words:
- regular bail
- hostile witness
- absconded
- knife
- liquor

3. Summary:
The accused applied for regular bail in FIR 627/2024 for an alleged stabbing under Section 109(1)/3(5) BNS. The prosecution alleged that Suraj stabbed the complainant while the accused accompanied him. The accused’s counsel highlighted that Suraj is already on bail and the complainant, during chief‑examination, turned hostile, claiming he was intoxicated and the assailant unidentified. The State opposed bail, alleging the accused had absconded and that the knife was handed to Suraj by the accused. The court noted the complainant’s discharge and intoxication, and, considering the circumstances, granted bail on a personal bond of Rs. 10,000 with surety. The order was to be transmitted to the jail superintendent, and the accompanying application was disposed of.

4. Conclusion:
Petition Allowed
Judgment :-

Judgment (Oral)

1. The accused/applicant seeks regular bail in case FIR No. 627/2024 of PS Bharat Nagar for offence under Section 109(1)/3(5) BNS.

2. Broadly speaking, allegation of the prosecution is that on the night intervening 26.09.2024 and 27.09.2024, the complainant de facto suffered stab injury on right scapular region and he alleged the assailants to be Suraj and the present accused/applicant. According to prosecution case, the stabbing was done by Suraj while the present accused/applicant was accompanying Suraj.

3. Learned counsel for accused/applicant submits that the alleged assailant Suraj has already been released on bail. It is further submitted that the complainant de facto in his chief-examination before the trial court turned hostile to prosecution and stated that at the time of alleged incident, he was consuming liquor and some unidentified person stabbed him.

4. Learned APP for State assisted by Investigating Officer/SI Sonal Raj opposes the bail application on the ground that the accused/applicant had absconded and could be arrested only after one year of the alleged incident. Learned APP for State submits that the knife used in stabbing was handed over to Suraj by the present accused/applicant. However, it is not denied that the complainant de facto was discharged from hospital on the same day of the incident and the MLC also shows that he was under influence of liquor.

5. Considering the overall circumstances described above, the bail application is allowed and the accused/applicant is directed to be released on bail subject to his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

6. A copy of this order be immediately transmitted to the concerned Jail Superintendent for informing the accused/applicant.

7. Accompanying application also stands disposed of.
 
  CDJLawJournal