Delhi High Court - Orders
Anand vs State (Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi) on 11 August, 2025
$~8
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.A. 1064/2025
ANAND .....Appellant
Through: Mr.Sarthak Tomar, Advocate
(through VC)
versus
STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP for State
with SI Sudhir Dahiya, PS Vijay
Vihar
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA
ORDER
% 11.08.2025 Crl.M.(Bail) 1612/2025 (Suspension of Sentence)
1. Applicant herein seeks suspension of sentence during pendency of the appeal which has been admitted for final hearing wherein assailed is the order of conviction dated 26.05.2025 and order on sentence dated 14.07.2025 in SC No. 57606/2016 passed by learned ASJ (03), North District, Rohini Courts, Delhi, arising out of FIR No. 439/2010 dated 30.12.2010 under Sections 186, 353, 332, 308, and 34 of IPC( Section 333 IPC was added in the charge-sheet subsequently) registered at Police Station Vijay Vihar, Delhi.
1.1 The appellant has been sentenced to simple imprisonment for a period of one month for offence punishable under Section 186 of the IPC along with fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine, further simple imprisonment for a period of ten days.
1.2 The appellant has further been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for 8 months for offence punishable under Section 353 of the CRL.A. 1064/2025 Page 1 of 5 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 11/08/2025 at 22:48:25 IPC, along with fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, further simple imprisonment for one month.
1.3 The applicant was further directed to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three years and six months for the offence punishable under section 333 IPC and also to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) and in default of which the convicts was sentenced to undergo further simple imprisonment for one month.
1.4 The applicant was further directed to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three years for the offence punishable u/s 308 IPC and also to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) and in default of which the convicts was sentenced to undergo further simple imprisonment for one month.
1.5 All the sentences to run concurrently.
2 The appeal was heard and admitted for hearing on 29.07.2025. 3 The nominal roll of the applicant was called for to verify whether there were any criminal antecedents; however, despite opportunity, the same has not been filed. On a query, the learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has no past history of any kind so as to impediment for seeking the benefit of suspension of sentence on that count. 4 In the aforesaid backdrop, I have heard the rival contentions and perused the case file.
5 At the threshold, learned counsel for the applicant pointed out that vide an order dated 23.07.2025, the co-convict, namely Amit who had undergone lesser period of sentence out of the total awarded to him has been granted the concession of the bail. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that even the applicant herein is on the same footing inasmuch as the co-
CRL.A. 1064/2025 Page 2 of 5This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 11/08/2025 at 22:48:25 convict Amit with a strong case and merits in the appeal and is likely to be acquitted. However, he submits that the appeal has since been admitted recently on 29.07.2025 is not likely to be listed for final hearing anytime soon, given the heavy pendency of this Court. He would otherwise also point out that there are inconsistencies and discrepancies in the statements of the prosecution, however, same is the matter of final arguments. 6 On merits, in the defence of applicant, his learned counsel would argue that PW-2 Constable Karambir admitted knowing the applicant (Anand) and alleging injury by him, but his MLC attributes the injury to the public. Similar contradictions appear in the MLCs of Constables Joginder and Ravinder, suggesting false implication. Two of six accused were acquitted on the same evidence, highlighting contradictions among injured police officials and lack of corroboration from other witnesses. PW-2 also admitted there was a public gathering, and MLCs show injuries caused by the public, not the applicant.
6.1 It is further submitted that the alleged customer with illicit liquor was neither examined nor was liquor seized. PW-5 denied witnessing any liquor purchase and stated police left the station without a DD entry, in civilian clothes, without arrest authority, violating constitutional rights. He was not posted on the relevant beat, and no secret information was conveyed to the SHO.
6.2 Counsel alleges police, in an intoxicated state, entered the applicant's house and misbehaved with his daughter, triggering public outrage and assault on police. Reliance is placed on Dhani Ram v. State of Himachal CRL.A. 1064/2025 Page 3 of 5 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 11/08/2025 at 22:48:25 Pradesh1 and Baliraj Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh2 which hold that contradictions and lack of independent witnesses make prosecution doubtful. Discrepancies in seizure memos, non-examination of key officers, and conflicting MLC and arrival timings further weaken the case. PW-8 confirmed the accused were also injured, indicating the applicant acted in good faith.
6.3 Finally, it is argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated to shield police misconduct; the matter has been pending for fifteen years; and he is the sole breadwinner, with his detention causing financial hardship to his family.
7 The appellant/applicant has no previous criminal history. Moreover, he remained on bail most of the period of trial which lasted 15 years. He did not at any stage misuse the concession of bail.
8 On a Court query, it transpires that as an undertrial he was arrested on 30.12.2010 and remained in preventive custody for about 8 months until he was granted bail by the Trial Court. Subsequently to the pronouncement of sentence by the Trial Court, he has further been under incarceration since 26.05.2025, resulting in a duration close to one year undergone from the total sentence of three years and six months.
9 Having heard the arguments, as noted in the preceding part, I am in agreement therewith only for the purpose of allowing the instant application. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the pending appeal, either way, the applicant is directed to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with surety of the like amount to the satisfaction 1 (2016) SCC Online HP 738 2 (2017) SCC Online SC 476 CRL.A. 1064/2025 Page 4 of 5 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 11/08/2025 at 22:48:25 of the Jail Superintendent and during pendency of the appeal his sentence shall accordingly remain suspended. While accepting the bond the Jail Superintendent shall impose following conditions:
(i) In case of change of residential address, the applicant shall promptly inform the same to the concerned Investigating Officer as well as to this Court.
(ii) The appellant shall regularly appear before the Court as and when the appeal is taken up for hearing.
10 With the aforesaid observations/directions, the application stands disposed of.
11 A copy of this order be communicated electronically forthwith to the concerned jail superintendent for information and necessary compliance.
Crl.A. 1064/2025List in due course.
ARUN MONGA, J AUGUST 11, 2025/SV CRL.A. 1064/2025 Page 5 of 5 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 11/08/2025 at 22:48:25