BAIL APPLN./3318/2026 of AKASH Vs STATE NCT OF DELHI on 24 September 2026

O R D E R

% 24.09.2026

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. By way of the present petition, the petitioner seeks grant of regular bail in FIR No. 24/2022, registered at Police Station Karawal Nagar, Delhi, for offences punishable under Sections 302/397/120B/34/411 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘IPC’).

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been in custody since 13.01.2022 and that the chargesheet has already been filed. He further submits that out of the total 42 witnesses cited by the prosecution, 15 witnesses have already been examined. It is submitted that there is no eyewitness to the incident and that the petitioner has been implicated primarily on the basis of the disclosure statement of the co-accused.

4. Learned counsel further submits that no Test Identification Parade

(TIP) was conducted with regards to the petitioner and that the petitioner was not one of the two persons who had entered the godown, namely, the co- accused Manish and Aman.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is no longer required for the purpose of investigation and that his continued incarceration would serve no useful purpose, particularly when the trial is likely to take considerable time.

6. Per contra, learned APP for the State submits that there is recovery of the gold chain and earrings belonging to the deceased from the petitioner. It is further submitted that the scooty allegedly used in the commission of the offence was also recovered from the petitioner. Learned APP submits that PW-6, Pinki Rani, has identified the petitioner in Court and that she is a witness to the last-seen circumstance. It is further submitted that the CDR and location details of the petitioner support the prosecution case.

7. Learned APP further submits that the petitioner has one more case registered against him involving an offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC.

8. The Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.

9. The prosecution case, as borne out from the record, is that the deceased was allegedly murdered in furtherance of a conspiracy to rob her of the gold jewellery worn by her. The record indicates that the gold chain and earrings of the deceased were recovered at the instance of the petitioner and were subsequently identified. The prosecution also relies upon the location details and CDRs of the accused persons as well as the last-seen evidence of PW-6, who has identified the petitioner in Court. The Trial Court, while considering the first bail application of the petitioner, had also taken note of the recovery effected from him and the last-seen evidence against him.

10. No doubt, 15 out of the 42 prosecution witnesses have been examined, however, the fact remains that the trial is still at the stage of prosecution evidence. The material on record discloses circumstances connecting the petitioner with the alleged offence, including the recovery of the wearing articles of the deceased from him and the identification of the petitioner by PW-6 in Court. The petitioner is also stated to have criminal antecedents, including another case under Section 302 of the IPC.

11. In view of the nature of the allegations, the circumstances relied upon by the prosecution, the recovery attributed to the petitioner, the evidence of the last-seen witness and the criminal antecedents of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

12. The present application is dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of.

13. Nothing stated herein shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

14. The order be uploaded on the website forthwith. MADHU JAIN, J SEPTEMBER 24, 2026/b/P