Delhi High Court
Swapnil vs The State N.C.T Of Delhi And Anr on 6 August, 2025
$~2
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 06.08.2025
+ BAIL APPLN. 1316/2025
SWAPNIL .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Mukesh Kalia and Ms. Kanika
Vohra, Advocates.
versus
THE STATE N.C.T OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Nawal Kishore Jha, APP for State
with IOs Inspector Icha Ram and
Inspector Raj Kumar
CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
J U D G M E N T (ORAL)
1. The accused/applicant seeks regular bail in case FIR No. 30/2021 of
PS Daryaganj for offence under Section 364A/377/419/347/120B IPC &
25/27 Arms Act. On behalf of State, the application is opposed through a
status report. I heard learned counsel for accused/applicant and learned APP
for State assisted by IOs/Inspector Ichha Ram and Inspector Raj Kumar.
2. Broadly speaking, prosecution case is that on 01.02.2021, on the
complaint of a lady, the FIR in question was registered, alleging that four
persons abducted her husband and demanded ransom through mobile phone
calls. Originally, the ransom demanded was Rs.5,00,000/-, but subsequently
the deal was settled at Rs.50,000/-. With the help of technical surveillance,
BAIL APPLN. 1316/2025 Page 1 of 5 pages
Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
GIRISH KATHPALIA
2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626c
acca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID – 7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c4879
65ff801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2025.08.06 18:03:37 -07’00’
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:NEETU N NAIR
Signing Date:06.08.2025
18:18:45
the alleged abductors were tracked down and a Head Constable was sent as
decoy with the ransom money to contact them. Simultaneously, the rescue
team also reached there and rescued the abducted victim X. The
accused/applicant and his accomplices were arrested. During further
investigation, X alleged that the accused/applicant forcibly put his penis in
the mouth of X and video recorded the incident. The incident of the alleged
abduction was captured on CCTV camera.
3. Against the above backdrop, learned counsel for the accused/applicant
argues that the accused/applicant deserves to be released on regular bail in
view of all judicially sanctified parameters. It is contended that the
accused/applicant was released on interim bail four times and he always
surrendered back, which shows that he is not a flight risk. Further, learned
counsel for accused/applicant also contends that X has not supported
prosecution case in his testimony as PW-1. It is also submitted that since all
public witnesses stand examined in court, the accused/applicant who was
arrested on 01.02.2021 (after deducting the period of interim bails, he has
already spent more than 02 years in jail) deserves to be now released on
bail, especially in view of his precarious health condition.
4. On the other hand, learned APP strongly opposes the bail application
on the ground that the ransom currency notes were recovered from the
accused/applicant. As regards the public witnesses having been examined,
learned APP on instructions of the IOs submits that one more public witness
namely Sarfaraz remains to be examined, since due to inadvertence, he was
BAIL APPLN. 1316/2025 Page 2 of 5 pages
GIRISH
Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec45569af3962c6fb4835d435f976
26cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID – 7047638, postalCode=110003,
KATHPALIA
st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c4
87965ff801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2025.08.06 18:03:58 -07’00’
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:NEETU N NAIR
Signing Date:06.08.2025
18:18:45
not named in the list of witnesses, so application under Section 311 CrPC
has been filed before the trial court. No other opposition to the bail
application has been raised.
5. To begin with, the argument of learned counsel for accused/applicant
that all public witnesses stand examined, so there is no possibility of
tampering with the evidence is met with by prosecution side alleging that
one more public person namely Sarfaraz remains to be examined. The issue
is as to whether Sarfaraz was not named in the list of witnesses only due to
inadvertence or is now sought to be introduced to nullify testimony of X,
who has not supported the prosecution.
5.1 In order to examine this aspect, I asked the IOs to show me the Case
Diary dated 02.02.2021, when Sarafarz is stated to have been examined by
the IO under Section 161 CrPC. But the IOs submit that they have not
brought the Case Diaries.
5.2 It has been repeatedly directed that the investigators must carry with
them the Case Diaries, to be shown to the court, as the Case Diaries are the
material which sanctify investigation. But in large number of cases, the
investigators do not bring Case Diaries and raise unacceptable excuses.
5.3 So presently, there is nothing before me to rule out that Sarfaraz is
being brought in at this belated stage after ‘X’ testified hostile to the
prosecution case.
BAIL APPLN. 1316/2025 Page 3 of 5 pages
Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
GIRISH KATHPALIA
2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626
cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID – 7047638, postalCode=110003,
st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487
965ff801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2025.08.06 18:04:13 -07’00’
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:NEETU N NAIR
Signing Date:06.08.2025
18:18:45
5.4 However, in this regard, I must add a cautious rider that these
observations are for the limited purposes of deciding whether the
accused/applicant who is in jail since 01.02.2021 be released on bail or not.
The issue shall be examined completely afresh by the trial court while
considering the application under Section 311 CrPC.
5.5 For present purposes, it appears that no public witness remains to be
examined.
6. I also find substance in the submission of learned counsel for
accused/applicant that he is not a flight risk as he was released four times on
interim bail but did not flee.
7. I have also examined the medical record of the accused/applicant, on
the basis whereof his interim bail application was pending till this day. Of
course, from the medical record it is prima facie reflected that he is being
given appropriate medical treatment in jail. But at the same time, his illness
cannot be ignored and the same can be treated as one of the grounds to grant
him relief, considering his prolonged undertrial incarceration.
8. Considering the overall circumstances described above, the bail
application is allowed and the accused/applicant is directed to be released on
bail subject to his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with
one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court.
BAIL APPLN. 1316/2025 Page 4 of 5 pages
Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA
GIRISH KATHPALIA
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca,
ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID – 7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801e26
fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2025.08.06 18:04:32 -07’00’
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:NEETU N NAIR
Signing Date:06.08.2025
18:18:45
9. Copy of this order be sent to the concerned Jail Superintendent for
being immediately conveyed to the accused/applicant.
Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
GIRISH 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec
45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca,
ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID – 7047638,
KATHPALIA
postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15
570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801
e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2025.08.06 18:04:48 -07’00’
GIRISH KATHPALIA
(JUDGE)
AUGUST 6, 2025/ry
BAIL APPLN. 1316/2025 Page 5 of 5 pages
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:NEETU N NAIR
Signing Date:06.08.2025
18:18:45