Munna vs State Of Nct Of Delhi on 20 November, 2025

[Cites 8, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Munna vs State Of Nct Of Delhi on 20 November, 2025

1. The present application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 20231 (erstwhile Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 19732) seeks regular bail in proceedings arising from FIR No. 115/2025 registered under Sections 123/309(6)/318(4)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 20233 at P.S. Darya Ganj, Delhi.

2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is as follows:

2.1. On 24th February, 2025, the complainant, Surrender, reported that while he was at Old Delhi Railway Station, co-accused Md. Naushad engaged him in conversation and persuaded him to take a particular e-

rickshaw driven by Munna (Applicant). During the ride, Naushad took a 1 "BNSS"

"CrPC"

BAIL APPLN. 3603/2025 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 21/11/2025 at 22:53:27 bottle of beverage 'Frooti' from the Applicant and insisted that the complainant must drink it. After consuming the same, the Applicant became semi-conscious.

2.2. The complainant regained consciousness on 26th February 2025 at LNJP Hospital, where he realised he had sustained injuries and that his belongings, including his mobile phone, bag, debit and credit cards, and original academic documents, were missing. He also discovered that approximately INR 66,430/- had been fraudulently withdrawn from his bank account.

2.3. Investigation revealed that the Applicant and co-accused Naushad were already in custody in another matter (FIR No. 208/2025, PS Kotwali). Upon seeking permission, both were arrested in the present case as well. A TIP was conducted on 5th April, 2025, during which the complainant correctly identified the Applicant and Naushad. During police custody remand, two of the complainant's original certificates were recovered at the instance of Naushad. The remaining documents were stated to have been handed over to another associate, Yusuf, who has not yet been traced. 2.4. The medical opinion records the complainant's injuries as simple. Investigation into the alleged fraudulent bank transactions is continuing and proposed to be filed through a supplementary chargesheet. The main chargesheet has been filed and the matter is listed for consideration on charge on 10th December, 2025.

3. Counsel for the Applicant submits that Applicant has been falsely implicated. The prosecution version suffers from material inconsistencies. The only incriminating circumstance is the TIP, which is unreliable as the 3 "BNS"

BAIL APPLN. 3603/2025 Page 2 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 21/11/2025 at 22:53:27 Applicant's photographs were allegedly shown beforehand. No intoxicating substance, bottle or wrapper has been recovered, nor does any medical or forensic material corroborate the allegation of administering 'Frooti'. The Applicant has remained in custody since 25th March, 2025, and with the investigation complete and the chargesheet filed, continued detention serves no investigative purpose and would be only punitive. The Applicant has no criminal antecedents, is a permanent resident of Delhi, and there is no likelihood of absconding or tampering with evidence. On these grounds, bail is sought.

4. Per contra, Mr. Aashneet Singh, APP for the State, opposes the bail application. It is submitted that the Applicant played a direct and pivotal role in the commission of the offence. He was present at the scene as the e- rickshaw driver, facilitated the movement of the complainant, and procured the Frooti allegedly administered by co-accused Naushad, after which the complainant became semi-conscious. Considering the gravity of the allegations and the Applicant's active involvement, it is urged that his release at this stage may result in witness intimidation or repetition of the offence.

5. The Court has considered the aforenoted facts and contentions. As per the Nominal Roll, the Applicant has been in custody since 25th March, 2025. The investigation is complete and the chargesheet has been filed; at this stage, the Applicant's custody is not necessary for investigation purposes.

6. On merits, the allegations regarding the Applicant's role in facilitating the complainant's movement, procuring the "Frooti" and being present at the scene, as well as the Applicant's objections relating to the TIP and the absence of any recovered intoxicant or corroborative medical/forensic BAIL APPLN. 3603/2025 Page 3 of 5 This is a digitally signed order.

7. As regards the apprehension of witness tampering, the same can be sufficiently mitigated through the imposition of appropriate conditions.

8. It is well established through catena of judgments by the Supreme Court that the object of granting bail is neither punitive nor preventative. The primary aim sought to be achieved by bail is to secure the attendance of the accused person at the trial.4

9. Considering the period of custody undergone, the completion of investigation, and the overall facts and circumstances, this Court is inclined to grant bail.

10. The Applicant is, therefore, directed to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond for a sum of INR 25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty MM, on the following conditions:

a. The Applicant shall cooperate in any further investigation as and when directed by the concerned IO;

b. The Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case or tamper with the evidence of the case, in any manner whatsoever; c. The Applicant shall under no circumstance leave the country without the permission of the Trial Court;

d. The Applicant shall appear before the Trial Court as and when directed;

See also: Sanjay Chandra v. CBI, (2012) 1 SCC 40; Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation, (2022) 10 SCC 51.

BAIL APPLN. 3603/2025 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 21/11/2025 at 22:53:27 e. The Applicant shall provide the address where he would be residing after his release and shall not change the address without informing the concerned IO/ SHO;

f. The Applicant shall, upon his release, give his mobile number to the concerned IO/SHO and shall keep his mobile phone switched on at all times. g. The Applicant shall report to the concerned PS on first Friday of every month;

11. In the event of there being any FIR/DD entry/complaint lodged against the Applicant, it would be open to the State to seek redressal by filing an application seeking cancellation of bail.

12. It is clarified that any observations made in the present order are for the purpose of deciding the present bail application and should not influence the outcome of the trial and also not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

13. The bail application is allowed in the afore-mentioned terms.

SANJEEV NARULA, J NOVEMBER 20, 2025/MK BAIL APPLN. 3603/2025 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 21/11/2025 at 22:53:27

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Delhi High Court - Orders