High CourtsSingle Bench(2026) 07 DEL CK 0317

Kanna @ Bhuvnesh vs State (Govt. Of N.C.T) Of Delhi

Delhi High Court, Principal Bench, New Delhi · Decided on 10 July 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Girish Kathpalia, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
BAIL APPLN. 1957/2026

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 356 words
1.

The accused/applicant seeks regular bail in case FIR No. 03/2024 of Police Station Jahangir Puri for offence under Section 307/120B/147/ 148/149/34 IPC & Section 25/27 of the Arms Act.

2.

After last date, status report was filed. I have heard learned counsel for accused/applicant and learned APP for State assisted by IO/SI Deepak Kumar. I have also heard learned counsel for complainant de facto.

3.

Broadly speaking, prosecution case is that on 04.01.2024, when the complainant de facto with his friends was present in park near his house, accused Akash, Mukesh, Babu, Suri, Sanju, Dehla, Bhairon and the present accused/applicant also were present there. Suddenly, all accused persons started attacking the complainant de facto, so he tried to run away, but Akash and Suri opened fire at him. Fortunately, the complainant de facto escaped unhurt, but the shots fired by the said two persons misfired and hit a child, who got injured.

4.

Learned counsel for accused/applicant submits that the prosecution version is not truthful and the accused/applicant is innocent. It is submitted that nine out of twelve accused persons already stand released on bail. It is submitted that even Akash and Suri who had allegedly opened fire also have been released on bail. It is also submitted that all three public witnesses of prosecution in their testimony have turned hostile to prosecution.

5.

Learned APP for State opposes the bail application on the ground of antecedents of the accused/applicant, but does not dispute that nine out of twelve accused persons, including those two who opened fire have been released on bail.

6.

Learned counsel for complainant de facto also opposes the application on the ground that the accused/applicant had initially absconded and it took six months to arrest him.

7.

Considering the overall circumstances as mentioned above, the bail application is allowed 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.

8.

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