[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Delhi High Court
Sanddep@ Chaman vs State Of Nct Delhi & Anr on 16 January, 2026
$~42
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 16.01.2026
+ BAIL APPLN. 176/2026 & CRL.M.A. 1497/2026
SANDDEP @ CHAMAN .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Pramod Kumar, Advocate
versus
STATE OF NCT DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP for State
with SI Renu, PS Wazirabad
CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
J U D G M E N T (ORAL)
1. The accused/applicant seeks regular bail in case FIR No.490/2025 of
PS Wazirabad, Delhi for offence under Section 109(1)/3(5) BNS & 25/27
Arms Act. Learned APP has submitted status report across the board, which
is accepted to be scanned and made part of the record.
2. Despite repeated directions that when the IO is on leave, at least the
concerned SHO should appear with the investigation file to assist the learned
prosecutor, in this case again, neither the IO/SI Heera Lal nor the SHO
Inspector Amit Kumar has appeared. The local police has opted to send one
SI Renu only. This has to be now deprecated strongly. In the absence of the
BAIL APPLICATION 176/2026 Page 1 of 4 pages
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
GIRISH 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec
45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca,
ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638,
postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15
570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801
e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2026.01.16 18:27:57 -08'00'
Digitally Signed
By:NEETU N NAIR
Signing Date:16.01.2026
18:25:36
Investigating Officer or the SHO, adjourning the bail matters would
certainly be wrong by adding to the incarceration period of the accused.
Repeatedly such directions were sent to the concerned DCPs by way of
judicial orders. It seems that those orders were not placed before the
concerned DCPs. The issue of liberty of an individual cannot be handled
insensitively. Copy of this order be sent to the Commissioner of Police
for information and necessary action.
3. The present case is on a similar footing. In view of overall
circumstances of the case, I find no reason to adjourn the matter just because
the IO and the SHO opted not to appear to assist the prosecutor. Not only
this, even from the order passed on the bail application of co-accused Ishant
(copy of which bail order dated 08.01.2026 has been produced by the
learned counsel for accused/applicant) it appears that at that time also IO/SI
Heera Lal opted not appear to assist the prosecution, so the matter was heard
and decided, granting bail by way of elaborate reasons.
4. Broadly speaking, prosecution case is that on 01.07.2025 at about
02:00am, the complainant de facto heard commotion outside his home, so he
came to the balcony and saw the co-accused Shibu standing outside with a
pistol, and he fired twice at the complainant de facto with the intention to
kill but the complainant de facto saved himself by running inside. After that
co-accused Shibu went away. The local police on arriving at the spot found
two empty shells and bullet dents. According to the status report filed today,
"During the course of the investigation the complainant and his daughter
BAIL APPLICATION 176/2026 Page 2 of 4 pages
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
GIRISH 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec4
5569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca,
KATHPALIA
postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15
570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801e
26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Digitally Signed Date: 2026.01.16 18:27:46 -08'00'
By:NEETU N NAIR
Signing Date:16.01.2026
18:25:36
told that the alleged Shibu came at the complainant's house with another
boy namely accused/applicant Sandeep. The CCTV cameras were analysed
nearby the complainant's house, wherein two boys were roaming nearby by
the complainant's house, who were identified by the complainant as Shibu
@ Anurag and his friend applicant Sandeep."
5. Learned counsel for accused/applicant submits that the accused/
applicant has been falsely implicated. It is also submitted that co-accused
Ishant, who also has been ascribed same role as the accused/applicant in the
present case, has already been granted bail by this Court on 08.01.2026.
6. On being called upon to show the said CCTV footage, SI Renu stated
that CCTV footage has been sent to FSL and cannot be produced. In the
course of hearing on the bail application of Ishant, there was no mention of
any such CCTV footage. In the cases where the investigator finds it
expedient, he/she produces a copy of such footage. This is the reason that
presence of the IO or the SHO would have thrown some more light.
7. At this stage, in the course of dictation of this order, SI Renu has
produced the alleged CCTV footage in mobile phone. The same has been
examined by me as well as by learned APP for State. No clear face is visible
in the said CCTV footage.
8. Be that as it may, merely because the accused/applicant was seen
roaming around in the area near the spot, does not attract his complicity in
the offence to the extent of curtailing his liberty. Moreover, the complainant
BAIL APPLICATION 176/2026 Page 3 of 4 pages
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
GIRISH 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afe
c45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca,
ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638,
KATHPALIA
postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d1
5570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff8
01e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Digitally Signed Date: 2026.01.16 18:27:34 -08'00'
By:NEETU N NAIR
Signing Date:16.01.2026
18:25:36
de facto in his complaint does not even whisper about presence of anyone
else with the co-accused Shibu.
9. There is no reason to deprive the accused/applicant liberty any
further. The Bail Application is allowed and 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 Trial
Court. Accompanying application also stands disposed of.
10. A copy of this order be immediately transmitted to the concerned Jail
Superintendent for informing the accused/applicant.
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=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d1
5570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff80
1e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2026.01.16 18:27:21 -08'00'
GIRISH KATHPALIA
(JUDGE)
JANUARY 16, 2026/as
BAIL APPLICATION 176/2026 Page 4 of 4 pages
