Interim Order 22

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: IN THE COURT OF MS. SURABHI SHARMA VATS, ASJ-04
(SHAHDARA), KARKARDOOMA COURTS, DELHI
SC No. 388/2023, IA No. 11/2025
State Vs. Himanshu Sharma
FIR No. 476/2023
PS Harsh Vihar
U/s 302/307/34 IPC
20.11.2025
File taken up on an application under Section 439
Cr.P.C. for grant of bail to the applicant/accused namely Himanshu
Sharma S/o Sh. Pramod Kumar Sharma.
Present: Sh. S.K. Dubey, Ld. Addl. PP for the State.
Sh. A.K. Pandey, Ld. Counsel for applicant/accused.
Arguments on the present bail application heard.
1. It is submitted by Ld. Counsel for the applicant/ accused
that applicant/ accused has been falsely implicated in the present case;
that the applicant/accused has nothing to do with the alleged offences;
that co-accused Kuldeep @ Landa and Suraj @ Vikas @ Kachri who
have graver role as of the applicant/accused have already been
admitted on bail by this Hon’ble Court, therefore, the applicant/
accused also deserves to be released on bail on the ground of parity.
2. Ld. Counsel for applicant/accused has further submitted
that chargesheet has been filed and the matter is at the stage of trial,
therefore, no fruitful purpose has been served by keeping the
applicant/accused behind bars; that the applicant/accused is ready to
abide by all the terms and conditions and is also ready to furnish
reliable surety to the satisfaction of the Hon’ble Court, if admitted on
bail.
3. Per-contra, Ld. PP for the State has opposed this bail
application while submitting that the allegations and offences against
-- 1 of 6 --
the accused/ applicant Himanshu Sharma S/o Sh. Pramod Kumar
Sharma are grave in nature. As per the case of the Prosecution as per
FIR is that on 13.08.2023, at about 8:30 PM, the complainant Mohit
alongwith his friends Kuldeep @ Landa and Shrikrishan @ Saajan
had gone to a vacant plot near Prem Nagar Chowk in UP; that
Kuldeep’s friend Vikas @ Kachri also came there; then, Kuldeep @
Landa and Vikas @ Kachri consumed liquor there; meanwhile, Vikas
@ Kachri had an altercation with some boy and scuffle/manhandling
took place between them. It is further stated that there were three
other boys present along with a tall boy; the accused Kuldeep @
Landa also started fighting with those boys in support of his friend
Vikas @ Kachri; in the meanwhile, one friend of Kachri who was
having vermillion on his head and was wearing jeans, also came
there; the taller boy also called 2-3 more boys there, due to which,
quarrel escalated; that one of those boys, who came later, was having
knife in his hand and the other boys who were present there picked up
bricks and stones in their hands and then, all those boys while abusing
attacked upon the complainant/injured Mohit and his friends, in a
deadly manner; that the boy who was having knife in his hand,
stabbed the complainant/injured Mohit @ Babu and his friend Saajan
(now deceased) with the knife; the public persons gathered there;
seeing blood oozing out from the person of Mohit @ Babu and
Saajan, Kuldeep @ Landa and Vikas @ Kachri fled away from the
spot.
4. During the course of investigation, on 14.08.2023, Crack
Team Members of PS Harsh Vihar had produced four persons i.e.
applicant/accused Himanshu Sharma and accused presons namely
Ranjeet Kumar Chander, Himanshu S/o Rajender and Gaurav before
the IO and it was informed that when they inquired about the
-- 2 of 6 --
incident, the informer informed that these four boys were present at
the spot at the time of the incident and they were suspected to be
involved in the incident, therefore, they had brought the accused
persons to the PS for enquiry. The complainant/victim Mohit
identified all the four persons including the applicant/accused
Himanshu Sharma and stated that they attacked victim/deceased
Saajan and him with a knife on 13.08.2023. He further stated that
accused/applicant Himanshu Sharma S/o Sh. Pramod Kumar and co-
accused Himanshu caught hold of victim/deceased Saajan and the boy
namely Gaurav had stabbed victim/deceased Saajan; that accused
Gaurav had also stabbed him and remaining three accused persons
had attacked upon Saajan and him with pieces of bricks. The
eyewitness of the incident i.e. accused Kuldeep @ Landa and Vikas
@ Kachi had also identified all the accused persons.
5. Ld. Addl. PP for the State has further stated that
Postmortem Report of the deceased/victim reveals the cause of death
as Haemorrhagic shock as a result of antemortem injury to right thigh
and its associated blood vessels produced by single edges sharp
cutting/stabbing weapon via injury 1 which is sufficient to cause
death in ordinary course of nature.
6. Ld. Addl. PP for the State has argued that the
applicant/accused Himanshu Sharma stands on an entirely different
footing from co-accused Kuldeep @ Landa and Vikas @ Kachri who
have been admitted on bail by this Hon’ble Court; that the
complainant Mohit, an injured eye-witness, has categorically
identified the applicant/accused as one of the attackers and has
specifically assigned an active role to him in the commission of the
-- 3 of 6 --
offence; that the applicant/accused is one of the assailants who
participated in the altercation and thereafter attacked the victims. It is
further argued that, as per the complainant’s initial statement, the co-
accused Kuldeep @ Landa and Vikas @ Kachri, who have been
admitted on bail, were themselves among the victims who were
assaulted by the assailants group and had fled the spot merely to save
their lives but to the contrary, the applicant/accused Himanshu
Sharma was one of the attacker, hence, the applicant/ accused cannot
claim parity with them, therefore, he may not be admitted on bail on
the ground of parity.
7. Arguments on this application heard. Record perused.
8. As per the case of Prosecution, the accused persons in
furtherance of their common intention, committed deadly attack upon
the complainant/injured Mohit @ Babu and Saajan (deceased) with a
knife, pieces of bricks and stones lying there and consequently killing
Saajan.
The allegations against the applicant/accused Himanshu
Sharma are grave in nature. It is stated by Ld. Addl. PP for the State
that during the investigation, the victim/complainant Mohit identified
all the four accused namely applicant/accused Himanshu Sharma,
Ranjeet Kumar Chander, Himanshu S/o Rajender and Gaurav and
stated that accused Himanshu S/o Rajender and the applicant/accused
Himanshu Sharma S/o Sh. Pramod Kumar caught hold of the
victim/deceased Saajan while he (victim/deceased) was being stabbed
by co-accused Gaurav.
-- 4 of 6 --
It is well settled principle of law that at the stage of
determining the question of bail, minute/ detailed evaluation of the
facts and appreciation of evidence on merits, is not to be done.
The applicant/accused Himanshu Sharma cannot be
treated at par with the co-accused Kuldeep @ Landa and Vikas @
Kachri who have been admitted on bail by this Hon’ble Court since,
the complainant Mohit, an injured eye-witness, has categorically
identified the applicant/accused as one of the attackers and has
specifically assigned an active role to him in the commission of the
offence and alleged that the applicant/accused was one of the
assailants who participated in the altercation and thereafter attacked
the victims but to the contrary, as per the complainant’s initial
statement, the co-accused Kuldeep @ Landa and Vikas @ Kachri
were themselves among the victims who were assaulted by the
assailants group and had fled the spot merely to save their lives.
The trial of the matter is at a nascent stage and even the
complainant has not been examined so far, therefore, possibility of
threatening the witnesses or tampering with the evidence cannot be
ruled out at this stage.
Considering the totality of the facts, circumstances,
manner in which the offences in question are allegedly committed
coupled with above stated reasons, this Court does not find it a fit
case to grant bail to the accused/ applicant Himanshu, at this stage.
Therefore, the present bail application stands, dismissed.
9.
Nothing expressed hereinabove, shall tantamount to any
opinion on the merits of this case.
10. In complicance of directions of Hon’ble Supereme Court
in case titled ‘
In Re: Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail’, Writ Petition
-- 5 of 6 --
(Crl.) No. 04/2021 dated 31.01.2023, e-copy of this order be sent to
applicant via e-mail through concerned Jail Superintendent for
information.
11. Copy of the order be given dasti to Ld. Counsel for
applicant/ accused and to the I.O, as per rules. Bail application stands
disposed of.
(SURABHI SHARMA VATS)
ASJ-04, Shahdara/KKD Courts,
Delhi/ 20.11.2025
-- 6 of 6 --