[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Delhi High Court
Sagar vs The State Govt Of Nct Of Delhi on 16 February, 2026
$~10
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 16.02.2026
+ BAIL APPLN. 2833/2025
SAGAR .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Brijballabh Tiwari and Mr. R.S.
Tomar, Advocates.
versus
THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Satinder Singh Bawa, APP for
State with SI Ramphool, PS
Ambedkar Nagar.
Counsel for complainant de facto
(appearance not given)
CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
J U D G M E N T (ORAL)
1. The accused/applicant seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No.
134/2025 of PS Ambedkar Nagar for offence under Section
498A/406/354/504/509/34 IPC.
2. Broadly speaking, the accused/applicant is husband of the
complainant de facto, who has lodged a lengthy complaint leading to
registration of the FIR. In the FIR, there are allegations regarding dowry
torture and criminal breach of trust related to stridhan. In paragraph 9 of the
FIR, it is alleged by the complainant de facto that the accused/applicant used
BAIL APPLN. 2833/2025 Page 1 of 4 pages
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
ec45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cac
ca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID -
KATHPALIA
7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d
15570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965
ff801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Digitally Signed Date: 2026.02.16 14:29:04 -08'00'
By:NEETU N NAIR
Signing Date:16.02.2026
14:34:45
to carry out unnatural sex with her and capture the same in video format in
his phone and used to threaten her that he would circulate those videos if she
lodged any complaint against him before anyone.
3. Learned counsel for accused/applicant submits that the allegations
against him are completely false. It is also contended that since with the
usual routine allegations of dowry torture, the accused/applicant could not
be sent to jail, the complainant de facto inserted paragraph 9 in the FIR so
that he has to be arrested. It is also contended that the accused/applicant has
surrendered both his mobile phones to the IO but nothing was found in the
same. Learned counsel submits that the accused/applicant is ready to ensure
that all his family members also handover their mobile phones to the IO.
4. The IO has not appeared. Even the SHO has not bothered to appear.
SI Ramphool is present but is not aware about complete facts. Looking into
old pendency of this application, I find it unjustified to adjourn.
5. Learned APP for State opposes the anticipatory bail application in
view of serious allegations in paragraph 9 of the FIR and further submits
that the mobile phones surrendered by the accused/applicant were shown to
the complainant de facto but she stated that the mobile phone actually used
by the accused/applicant was a different one.
6. Learned counsel for complainant de facto contends that
accused/applicant does not have a fixed place of abode and has been shifting
BAIL APPLN. 2833/2025 Page 2 of 4 pages
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
ec45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacc
a, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID -
KATHPALIA
7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d
15570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965f
f801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Digitally Signed Date: 2026.02.16 14:28:53 -08'00'
By:NEETU N NAIR
Signing Date:16.02.2026
14:34:45
residences repeatedly, so cannot be granted anticipatory bail.
7. As mentioned above, in her lengthy complaint, the complainant de
facto has levelled multiple allegations related to the alleged dowry torture
and criminal breach of trust qua stridhan. Almost all those allegations are
specific in nature, in the sense that the year, month, and even date of each
incident has been mentioned. But when it comes to allegations in paragraph
9 of the FIR qua filming the unnatural sex, there is complete vagueness in
the sense that not just the date, even month or year of the alleged filming has
not been mentioned. Further, in her FIR, the complainant de facto made
absolutely no whisper about the nature of the phone allegedly used while
filming the unnatural sex and now, the complainant de facto tells the IO that
the phones surrendered by the accused/applicant are not the ones used in
filming the unnatural sex. Admittedly, neither of the surrendered mobile
phones contains any objectionable material.
8. It would also be significant to keep in mind that even according to the
complainant de facto, the accused/applicant had threatened to circulate those
videos if she lodged any complaint. The present FIR was lodged in Feburary
2025 and admittedly, the accused/applicant never shared any such alleged
video with anyone, which prima facie, creates suspicion about truthfulness
of such allegation.
9. Of course, the above material is yet to be tested before the trial court
through full dress trial. But for present purposes, I do not find sufficient
BAIL APPLN. 2833/2025 Page 3 of 4 pages
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec455
69af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH
COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638,
KATHPALIA
postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570
996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801e26fa,
Digitally Signed cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2026.02.16 14:28:42 -08'00'
By:NEETU N NAIR
Signing Date:16.02.2026
14:34:45
material to deny liberty to the accused/applicant. More so, in view of total
laxity on the part of investigating authorities to oppose the present
anticipatory bail application.
10. The application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of his
arrest, the accused/applicant shall 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 IO/SHO concerned. Of course, the
accused/applicant shall join the investigation as and when directed in writing
by the IO/SHO concerned.
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
GIRISH 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4af
ec45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacc
a, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID -
KATHPALIA
7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d
15570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965f
f801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2026.02.16 14:28:30 -08'00'
GIRISH KATHPALIA
(JUDGE)
FEBRUARY 16, 2026/ry
BAIL APPLN. 2833/2025 Page 4 of 4 pages
