Regular bail granted on medical grounds and failure to conduct Test Identification Parade during investigation.

The applicant seeks regular bail in FIR No. 158/2020 (PS Budh Vihar) registered under Sections 302/34 IPC and Sections 25/27/54/59 of the Arms Act

The FIR originated from a statement by one Deepanshu, alleging that during an altercation, a "tall boy" (allegedly the applicant) stabbed the deceased, Harshdeep Singh

The applicant was not named in the FIR and was granted interim bail on 02.05.2025 due to Chronic Myeloid Leukemia

The State opposed the bail, noting that the applicant was identified during the investigation and trial, and was allegedly involved in a robbery while on interim bail

However, the applicant was released in the robbery case following a failed Test Identification Parade (TIP)

All co-accused persons have been released on bail

Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail on medical grounds and due to procedural infirmities regarding his identification

The court primarily applied Section 302 (Murder) and Section 34 (Common Intention) of the IPC, alongside Sections 25, 27, 54, and 59 of the Arms Act

It further relied on the discretionary principles governing the grant of bail, specifically considering humanitarian grounds for terminal illnesses (Stage IV cancer) and the evidentiary weight of identification procedures, such as the Test Identification Parade (TIP), in cases where the accused was previously unknown to the witness

The court balanced the gravity of the offense with the applicant’s deteriorating health and procedural gaps in the prosecution's case.

It noted that the applicant suffers from Stage IV cancer (Chronic Myeloid Leukemia)

Critically, the court observed that the applicant was not known to the complainant de facto and was not named in the FIR, yet the Investigating Officer failed to conduct a TIP

The court found the State’s explanation for this failure insufficient, especially since identification occurred only during the investigation and trial

Furthermore, the court dismissed the State's concern regarding the applicant's alleged criminal antecedents during interim bail, noting he was released in the subsequent robbery case due to a failed TIP

Considering that co-accused persons were already at liberty, the court determined that further incarceration was unwarranted

The court held that the combination of the applicant's medical condition and the lack of a TIP justified his release

The applicant was directed to be released upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 10,000 with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court