Courts are not to conduct mini-trials at the bail stage. A dying declaration, even if not recorded by a Magistrate, provides a sufficient prima facie basis for denying bail when corroborated by circumstantial evidence and coupled with concerns over an applicant’s criminal antecedents and potential trial interference.

JUDGMENT :

1. By virtue of the present bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023,[Hereinafter “BNSS”], the applicant seeks grant of regular bail in proceedings arising out of FIR No.121/2025 dated 10.03.2025 registered at PS.: Ghazipur, Delhi under Sections 103(1)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023,[Hereinafter “BNS”].

2. As per FIR, on 10.03.2025 at about 01:00 AM, the complainant received a telephonic call from Rohit,[Hereinafter “deceased”] (since deceased), who requested him to bring his scooter to help collect diesel. After collecting diesel in a 40-litre oil can, while the complainant and deceased were returning on the wrong side of the road near Phool Mandi cut on NH-24, a blue car carrying 3 to 4 persons approached them from behind. The complainant identified Yamin as the driver of the said vehicle, along with Taleem and Talib, and stated that he can identify another occupant upon seeing him. The said car overtook them, and when Rohit stopped the scooter, Yamin fired a gunshot at the deceased, which struck him on his left shoulder. Another occupant of the car fired a second gunshot at the oil can being carried, resulting in diesel spilling on the road. Whereafter, the attackers fled towards Uttar Pradesh. Despite sustaining injuries, the deceased remained conscious and named Nazim, Yamin, Kapil, Talib and the present applicant as persons involved in the incident. The complainant, with the assistance of a passer-by, took the deceased to LBS Hospital, where he succumbed to his injuries during treatment.

3. As per the post-mortem, the cause of death was opined as “Haemorrhagic shock consequent upon gunshot injuries to lungs and heart produce by riffled firearm projectile and sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. All the injuries are fresh in duration and ante-mortem in nature”. During the course of investigation, the Police inspected the place of occurrence and seized relevant exhibits, including blood samples, soil samples and empty cartridges. Based thereon, the present FIR came to be registered and the accused persons were taken into judicial custody.

4. Of the many grounds raised in the present application, Mr. N. Hariharan, learned senior counsel for the applicant primarily submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present FIR. Even otherwise, it is not the case of the prosecution that the applicant was physically present at the scene of the alleged offence and the role attributable to him is limited to that of a supposed conspirator, however, there is no material on record to show that the applicant ever met the co-accused persons, Yamin, Talib, or Naved prior to the incident. In fact, neither has the investigation yielded any intercepted communication, CCTV footage, and recovery linking the applicant to any preparatory act, nor has any incriminating material/ evidence such as fingerprints, DNA, weapon, vehicle used in the commission of the alleged offence, blood-stained clothes, etc., have been recovered at the instance of the applicant herein.

5. The learned senior counsel submitted that the alleged oral dying declaration is wholly unreliable as it was neither recorded by a Magistrate nor supported by any medical certification as to the deceased’s fitness to speak. On the con