The High Court of Delhi granted regular bail to an accused in a 2021 murder case and expressed concern over prolonged pendency of bail applications. Justice Girish Kathpalia delivered the order on February 12, 2026 in Amir v. State NCT of Delhi, BAIL APPLN. 4703/2024 & CRL.M.(BAIL) 1945/2025.
Background of the Case
Amir moved the High Court seeking regular bail in FIR No. 654/2021 registered at Police Station Seemapuri for offences under Sections 302/307/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
On the day of the incident, complainant Anees and his friends—Subhan, Sohail, Arshad, and Sameer—were sitting together. According to the prosecution, accused Hemant, Nursingh, and Amir arrived at the spot and began quarrelling.
During the altercation, Hemant allegedly caught hold of Shoaib from behind while Nursingh stabbed him with a sharp object. When Sohail intervened, Amir allegedly restrained him from behind. Nursingh then stabbed Sohail as well. Shoaib later died due to the injuries, whereas Sohail survived.
Submissions Before the Court
Appearing for the petitioner, Mr. Aman Akhtar, Advocate, submitted that Amir has remained in custody since October 24, 2021. He contended that the incident occurred in the spur of the moment. He further pointed out that the person allegedly restrained by the petitioner survived and has already deposed before the trial court.
At the bail stage, the Court cannot conduct a detailed examination of evidence. Nevertheless, counsel argued that a complete reading of Sohail’s testimony does not inspire confidence.
Opposing the plea, Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP for the State, appeared along with Investigating Officer Inspector Prashant Anand. The State, however, acknowledged that all public witnesses stand examined. It also conceded that no possibility of witness tampering exists if the accused is released on bail.
Court’s Observations on Delay
Justice Kathpalia recorded that the bail application had remained pending before the trial court for 25 months despite an early hearing request. The High Court application had also remained pending since December 20, 2024 and came up before the present Bench for the first time on the date of decision.
Describing the situation as a matter of serious concern, the Court emphasised that bail applications should not remain pending for inordinately long periods. Judicial precedents consistently hold that courts must decide bail pleas promptly, whether by allowing or dismissing them.
According to the Court, such delay itself causes trauma to an incarcerated accused and results in violation of fundamental rights.
Final Order
In view of these circumstances, the Court found no reason to continue depriving the petitioner of his liberty and allowed the bail application.
Amir must furnish a personal bond of ₹10,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. The Court disposed of the pending application and directed immediate transmission of the order to the concerned Jail Superintendent for informing the accused.
For the Petitioner (Amir): Mr. Aman Akhtar, Advocate
For the State (Respondent): Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP
