Primary sources · Judgment
AKASH @YATESH KUMAR @DANNY Vs THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI
BAIL APPLN. 1947/2026 Page 1 of 4 pages
$~2
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 13.08.2026
# CNR No. DLHC010223072026
+ BAIL APPLN. 1947/2026
AKASH @YATESH KUMAR @DANNY .....Petitioner
Through: Ms. A.S. Juneja, Advocate.
versus
THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Hemant Mehla, APP for State
with IO/SI Shiv Dayal.
CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
J U D G M E N T (ORAL)
1. The accused/applicant seeks regular bail in case FIR No.698/2023 of
Police Station Harsh Vihar for offence under Section 307/34 IPC & Section
25/27/54/59 of the Arms Act.
2. This is yet another case, where learned APP strongly expresses
anguish that the Investigating Officer/SI Shiv Dayal has not come and has
sent SI Rahul Ranjan, who is not aware about facts of the case. The
BAIL APPLN. 1947/2026 Page 2 of 4 pages
accused/applicant is languishing in jail since 28.12.2023. This is certainly
not the manner in which the State is expected to treat liberty of the citizens.
Repeatedly, such defaults on the part of investigating agency come up and
the orders are repeatedly sent to the Commissioner of Police. But nothing
has changed. Learned APP for State assures that copy of this order shall be
delivered to the Commissioner of Police through the Senior Standing
Counsel and if again such default occurs, such orders may be sent to the
Secretary, Home Affairs so that the system gets streamlined and the State
agencies start respecting liberty of the citizens.
3. Broadly speaking, allegation against the accused/applicant is that on
24.12.2023, along with two co-accused persons, namely Vikas and Rajan,
accused/applicant fired one bullet at the complainant de facto, but the latter
managed to save himself, after which Vikas and the present
accused/applicant fled the spot, though co-accused Rajan was apprehended.
Rajan has already been released on bail.
4. Learned counsel for accused/applicant submits that the eye witness in
his testimony as PW4 has not supported prosecution case. Further, it is
submitted that all public witnesses already stand examined in trial, so no
purpose would be served by keeping the accused/applicant in jail.
5. Learned APP expresses inability to oppose the bail application as he
is not assisted by the Investigating Officer.
BAIL APPLN. 1947/2026 Page 3 of 4 pages
6. Since the accused/applicant is in jail with effect from 28.12.2023, I
find no reason to adjourn the matter awaiting the Investigating Officer to
appear and assist.
7. Most important aspect is that the misfired bullet was recovered from
the spot and it matched with one of the pistols allegedly used by the
assailants. On the basis of limited information supplied by SI Rahul Ranjan,
learned APP submits that two pistols were used in the alleged offence, out of
which one was recovered from the present accused/applicant while the other
was found lying at the spot itself. The bullet recovered from the spot
matched with the pistol recovered from the spot itself and not with the pistol
recovered from the accused/applicant.
8. Of course on these aspects, the trial court shall take independent view
as regards culpability of the accused/applicant.
9. Considering the above circumstances, I find no reason to deprive
liberty to the accused/applicant. Therefore, the bail application is allowed
and the accused/applicant is directed to be released on bail subject to his
furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/- with one surety in the
like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court.
10. Copy of this order be sent to the concerned Jail Superintendent for
BAIL APPLN. 1947/2026 Page 4 of 4 pages
being informed to the accused/applicant.
GIRISH KATHPALIA
(JUDGE)
AUGUST 13, 2026/ry