Nafe Singh @ Mantri v. State (N.C.T. of Delhi) & Anr

J U D G M E N T (ORAL)

¶1The accused/applicant seeks regular bail in case FIR No. 766/2015 of PS Chhawla for offence under Section 302/307/34 IPC and Section 27/54/59 of Arms Act.

¶2After last date, status report was filed. I have heard learned counsel for accused/applicant and learned APP for State assisted by IO/ACP Anil

2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec45569af3 962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi, serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570996b 40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801e26fa, cn=GIRISH Date: 2026.08.19 17:05:28 +05'30'

Page 2 of 3 pages Kumar.

¶3Broadly speaking, allegation against the accused/applicant is as follows. On 20.12.2015, the accused/applicant accompanied with co-accused Pradeep, Ashok and Dharmender attacked the deceased and fired multiple gunshots, thereby killing him on the spot. In the incident, the eye witness Suraj Bhan escaped without any injury, but subsequently in the year 2024, Suraj Bhan was murdered.

¶4Learned counsel for accused/applicant seeks grant of bail on parity with co-accused Pradeep, who was granted bail by this court vide judgment dated 16.03.2026.

¶5Learned APP for State assisted by the IO strongly opposes bail application of the accused/applicant, contending that this is not a fit case for parity with the co-accused Pradeep.

¶6The only ground on which bail is sought being parity with co-accused Pradeep, I have examined both the cases. I find substance in the submission of prosecution that case of the present accused/applicant is distinct from that of co-accused Pradeep.

¶7That is so because admittedly, earlier in the year 2023, the present accused/applicant was granted interim bail for a period of 07 days but he

2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec45 569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi, serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d1557 0996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801e26fa , cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA Date: 2026.08.19 17:05:17 +05'30'

Page 3 of 3 pages jumped bail and could be arrested only in the year 2025 after he was declared Proclaimed Offender. That did not happen in this case of co-accused Pradeep. The accused/applicant having jumped the interim bail in such a manner, I am in agreement with the prosecution that it cannot be said that there is no likelihood of his jumping the bail again in order to evade the trial. Further, the present accused/applicant is also involved in case under MCOCA as well as four more murder cases.

¶8Besides that, another important factor while granting bail to co-accused Pradeep was that he was in custody for past 10 years and no witness of prosecution was examined, whereas so far as the present accused/applicant is concerned, it is only because of his having absconded that the trial got stuck and in the meanwhile, the eye witness Suraj Bhan died.

¶9Therefore, the present bail application and accompanying applications are dismissed.

¶10Copy of this order be sent to the concerned Jail Superintendent for being informed to the accused/applicant.

GIRISH KATHPALIA (JUDGE) AUGUST 19, 2026/ry

2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec45 569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi, serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d155 70996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801e26 fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA Date: 2026.08.19 17:05:05 +05'30'

Page 1 of 3 pages * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 19.08.2026 # CNR No. DLHC010285472026 + BAIL APPLN. 2508/2026, CRL.M.A.25421/2026 & 25420/2026 NAFE SINGH @ MANTRI .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Aakash Godara, Advocate (through video conferencing). versus STATE (N.C.T. OF DELHI) & ANR. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for State with IO/ACP Anil Kumar. CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA