Delhi Police had lodged a case against Hussain for offences of attempt to murder, rioting and criminal conspiracy.

Saying that the high court had granted Hussain bail in two other incidents wherein the details of the place and time were proximate to the current one, Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Pulastya Pramachala gave him the relief.

The judge clarified that a bail order may not be a precedent for other case.

"..in the aforesaid peculiar situation, bail granted to the applicant by a court higher in hierarchy to this court, does create a material change in the circumstances in favour of the applicant,” the court said.

Moreover, it was also noted by the court that many of the witnesses are common in all the FIRs and the high court had appreciated the merits in the earlier two cases before granting bail to Hussain.

“In that situation for this court there may not be a reason to take a different view. This material change in the circumstance in itself becomes a ground to grant bail to the accused/applicant in this case as well. Hence, application is allowed,” the court said.

However, Madhukar Pandey, Special Public Prosecutor argued that bail order is not binding precedent. Anything stated in the bail order, is peculiar to that case only and therefore, bail granted in other cases cannot be a material change of circumstance for this case.

He further submitted that public witnesses reside in same vicinity and they will feel threatened due to release of applicant.

Hussain along with co-accused persons, is facing trial for various charges including under Section 307 read with Section 120B and 149 of the Indian Penal Code, in respect of incident related to injured Goswami.

While the court granted him bail, it imposed certain conditions on him saying that he shall not leave the country without express permission from it, that he should not try to influence witnesses, etc.

"Applicant Mohd. Tahir Hussain is admitted to bail, on his furnishing P/B and S/B in the sum of Rs 1,00,000 each with one surety in the like amount," the court added.

Complainant Goswami had alleged that on February 25, 2020, he had come to his uncle’s home, and at about 3:50 p.m. he was going to his home at C 153, Gali No. 21, Khajuri Khas, Delhi. When he was at the corner of gali, he saw a huge mob on main Karawal Nagar road indulging into pelting stones and firing gun shots.

Goswami on seeing this started running back towards home of his uncle in gali no. 8, Moonga Nagar. At that time, he felt being hit on his hip by some bullet.