Delhi HIgh Court

Delhi HC: Inconsistencies in Evidence Lead to Bail in Akhtar Hussain Case

Updated
Feb 8, 2026 3:08 PM
delhi-hc-inconsistencies-in-evidence-lead-to-bail-in-akhtar-hussain-case

Summary: On January 22, 2026, the Delhi High Court allowed Mohd. Mustak to be released from jail while awaiting trial in a case involving the alleged attack and later death of Akhtar Hussain. The decision was based on various factors, including inconsistencies in evidence and the timeline of events.

The Incident on September 26, 2023

On September 26, 2023, a heated argument broke out between Mohd. Mustak and Akhtar Hussain in New Delhi. During this fight, Mustak allegedly hit Hussain on the head with a rod. Witness Aman reported the incident, and Hussain was taken to a hospital, but sadly, he passed away a few days later.

Arguments and Evidence

Mohd. Mustak's lawyers argued that he was innocent and wrongly accused. They questioned why Hussain was taken to a hospital in Ghaziabad instead of a closer one. The lawyers also pointed out inconsistencies in the Medical Legal Certificate (MLC) and the testimony of Aman, who mentioned that a contractor promised to cover medical expenses.

"The way Akhtar Hussain was supposedly hurt doesn't seem believable," argued Mustak's lawyer.

Changes in Charges

Initially, the case was registered under a charge for causing serious injury, but after Hussain's death, it was changed to a charge for murder. However, the defense highlighted issues with the evidence, such as the delayed recovery of the alleged weapon and lack of forensic links between the rod and the crime.

Arrest and Bail Decision

Mustak was not arrested immediately; it took seven months to catch him. He has been in jail since April 19, 2024. Judge Girish Kathpalia found no reason to keep Mustak in jail any longer, given the circumstances and evidence.

"I find no reason to keep the accused in jail," stated Judge Kathpalia.

Bail Conditions

The court allowed Mustak to be released on bail with a condition that he provide a personal guarantee of Rs.10,000 with someone else also vouching for the same amount. This decision was communicated to the jail authorities for immediate action.

This case shows the complexities of legal proceedings and the importance of thoroughly examining evidence.