New Delhi [India], September 24 : The Delhi High Court has dismissed the anticipatory bail plea of a 20-year-old man accused of being involved in an assault and firing incident in the Hazrat Nizamuddin area, observing that photographs and video footage placed before the court showed him as an active participant in the incident.
Justice Mini Pushkarna, in an order dated September 23, dismissed the plea filed by Mohammad Shahrukh in connection with the FIR registered at Hazrat Nizamuddin police station under various provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Arms Act.
According to the FIR, the incident took place on August 1, 2025, at around 10 pm at a perfume shop in Basti Hazrat Nizamuddin. The complainant alleged that Ahsan, along with his sons Saif and Sahnoor and other persons, entered the shop, abused and assaulted him, following which four to five rounds were allegedly fired from pistols. One of the bullets struck the complainant’s brother in the leg.
Shahrukh’s counsel, however, argued that he was neither named in the original FIR nor during the initial investigation. It was submitted that the initial chargesheet, filed after collection of statements, call detail records and CCTV footage, did not name him and no incriminating material was found against him at that stage.
The defence further submitted that after cognisance had been taken, a new investigating officer undertook further investigation and relied upon allegedly belatedly produced CCTV footage and supplementary statements of the complainant and another witness, who identified Shahrukh in the footage. The counsel also submitted that Shahrukh was a student, had no previous criminal antecedents and was about 20 years old.
The prosecution opposed the plea and told the court that during further investigation, Shahrukh was identified on the basis of CCTV footage. Police subsequently visited his residence but did not find him there, and he was also not found at his original place of residence in Bulandshahr, Uttar Pradesh. The police told the court that his family members did not disclose his whereabouts.
The State further informed the court that a non-bailable warrant had been issued against Shahrukh by the trial court on August 4, 2026, and proceedings under Section 84 of the BNSS for declaring him absconding were initiated on August 20, 2026.
The complainant’s senior counsel also placed photographs and a video before the High Court. The court noted that the material showed Shahrukh allegedly holding a large plant pot and throwing it towards the shop, and described him as an active participant rather than a mere spectator.
Considering the nature of the occurrence and the specific role attributed to Shahrukh, the court found no ground to grant him relief. It also took note of the prosecution’s submission that he had not joined the investigation and that his custodial interrogation was required for effective investigation. 
The High Court also referred to the Supreme Court’s 2024 judgment in Srikant Upadhyay v. State of Bihar, which held that anticipatory bail is an extraordinary remedy to be exercised cautiously and judiciously, particularly where arrest warrants or proclamation proceedings have been issued and the applicant has been absconding.
“Considering the overall conspectus of the facts and circumstances of the present case,” Justice Pushkarna said, the court was not inclined to grant anticipatory bail and accordingly dismissed the applications.
The court clarified that its observations were confined to deciding the bail proceedings and would not amount to an opinion on the merits of the case or prejudice the rights and contentions of the parties during further proceedings.
Advocates: Mohammad Shahrukh was represented by advocates Asad Iqbal and Abuzar. The State was represented by APP Sunil Kumar Gautam, while senior advocates Kirti Uppal and Sacchin Puri, along with other counsel, appeared for the complainant.