Nisha v. State NCT of Delhi

2. Broadly speaking, the prosecution case as culled out of the FIR registered on the statement of injured Shekhar Jha is as follows. On 15.12.2024 at about 11:00pm, he along with his friend Arun (the deceased) visited Ms. Pratima, a friend of Arun. At Pratima’s house there was some exchange of hot words between them on which the accused/applicant, a (ORAL)

1. The accused/applicant seeks regular bail in case FIR No. 693/2024 of PS Pandav Nagar for the offence under Section 103(1)/115(2)/3(5) BNS. resident of the upper floor came down and Arun asked her not to get involved, which led to further exchange of fisticuffs. In the meanwhile, one slim boy came down from upper floor and hit stone on the head of Arun and fled out. Thereafter, Arun and the complainant de facto proceeded further on their motorcycle. After they had travelled hardly 100 meters, the said lady from floor above the floor of Pratima came down along with that slim boy and one more boy. All three of them stopped the motorcycle of the complainant de facto. Those two boys were carrying dandas while the lady was carrying a brick. The lady exhorted those two boys to kill Arun and complainant de facto, after which all three of them assaulted Arun and the complainant de facto with dandas and bricks. On account of that assault, Arun having suffered head injury fell down after which all three assailants ran towards the complainant de facto but he fled and reached the police station to lodge complaint. In the said complaint itself, the complainant de facto named all three assailants as Faizan, Rajesh and Nisha (the present accused/applicant).

3. Against the above backdrop, learned counsel for accused/applicant submits that this is a fit case to release the accused/applicant on bail because there is no reliable evidence to connect the accused/applicant with the alleged occurrence. It is contended that no test identification parade was carried out; that no blood was found on the bricks allegedly used in the assault by the accused/applicant; that there is a delay of 10 hours in registering the FIR; and that the accused/applicant is a divorcee, bringing up a minor child suffering with Tuberculosis.

4. On the other hand learned prosecutor strongly opposes the bail application, taking me through the abovementioned record. It is contended by learned prosecutor that Shekhar Jha is yet to be examined in trial and if the accused/applicant is granted bail, he shall interfere in the trial proceedings. It is argued by learned APP that it is not necessary that on being hit, the blood would immediately spill over the brick. Learned APP has also referred to order dated 21.11.2025 of a coordinate bench of this Court whereby bail application No. 4022/2025 filed by the accused Rajesh was dismissed by way of detailed order, taking into account the serious nature of the manner in which murder of Arun was allegedly committed.

5. Considering the nature of the offence and the manner in which it was committed and also the stage of the trial proceedings, I do not find it a fit case at this stage to release the accused/applicant on bail. Therefore, the bail application is dismissed.

GIRISH KATHPALIA (JUDGE) JANUARY 13, 2026