[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Delhi High Court
Shatan Bishnoi @ Santosh vs State Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi on 9 March, 2026
$~80
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 09.03.2026
+ BAIL APPLN. 1734/2025
SHATAN BISHNOI @ SANTOSH .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Vikalp Sharma, Advocate
versus
STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for the State
with Inspector Sanjeev Kumar
CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
J U D G M E N T (ORAL)
1. The applicant/accused seeks regular bail in case FIR No. 154/2023 of
Police Station Special Cell for offence under Section 18 & 24 of the NDPS
Act. This bail application was taken up for the first hearing on 06.05.2025
before the predecessor bench, and thereafter remained pending before
different benches. Today is the first hearing before me.
2. Broadly speaking, the prosecution case is that on the basis of secret
information, a raid was carried out in which, from a truck being driven by
accused Mohan Lal, 41.260 kg opium being transported from Manipur to
BAIL APPLN. 1734/2025 Page 1 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
Digitally Signed f801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2026.03.09 19:01:10 -07'00'
By:NEETU N NAIR
Signing Date:09.03.2026
18:05:51
Delhi, was recovered. The role ascribed to the accused/applicant is that it is
he, who booked the transported opium from Manipur and thereafter, he flew
down to Delhi.
3. Learned counsel for accused/applicant contends that he is in jail since
19.06.2023 despite there being no admissible evidence against him. It is
contended that the accused/applicant is in jail solely on basis of confessional
statement of accused Mohan Lal, recorded in police custody.
4. Learned APP assisted by IO/Inspector Sanjeev Kumar contends that
the involvement of the accused/applicant is on the basis of Section 29 of the
NDPS Act as a conspirator. As regards the evidence of the alleged
conspiracy, the learned APP submits that the evidence is in the form of
location of the accused/applicant in Manipur prior to dispatch of the
consignment and the telephone calls exchanged between the
accused/applicant and co-accused Mohan Lal. No other evidence of the
alleged conspiracy has been collected by the IO.
5. So far as the location of the accused/applicant in Manipur prior to the
alleged dispatch of the contraband is concerned, the same is deduced by the
IO on the basis of mobile phone location of the accused/applicant. Similarly,
as regards telephonic connectivity between the accused/applicant and co-
accused Mohan Lal, the investigator relies upon mobile phone numbers of
both of them.
6. But as regards the mobile phone number ascribed to the
BAIL APPLN. 1734/2025 Page 2 of 4 pages
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
c45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca,
ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638,
KATHPALIA
postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d1
5570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff8
Digitally Signed 01e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2026.03.09 19:00:59 -07'00'
By:NEETU N NAIR
Signing Date:09.03.2026
18:05:51
accused/applicant, learned APP on instructions of the IO fairly submits that
the said number, according to CAF (Customer Application Form) belongs to
one Haukholen Akipjen. There is no material, prima facie, to connect the
accused/applicant with the said mobile phone, which was found located in
Manipur and which was found in connectivity with mobile phone of the co-
accused.
7. Further, it is a matter of common knowledge that the mobile phone
tower covers a large area and large number of mobile phones being operated
from that area. Furthermore, it is nobody's case that the telephonic calls,
even if the same were between the accused/applicant and the co-accused,
were intercepted and conversation was recorded. Mere telephonic
connectivity, without there being any material as regards what was
conversed between two persons cannot be treated as incriminating evidence,
unless there is something more, which is not the present case. In any case, as
mentioned above, there is no material to establish that the co-accused
Mohan Lal was in telephonic connectivity with the accused/applicant,
because admittedly the mobile phone ascribed to the accused/applicant is in
someone else's name.
8. Considering the above circumstances, I do not find any reason to
deprive further liberty to the accused/applicant. Therefore, 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.
BAIL APPLN. 1734/2025 Page 3 of 4 pages
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
fec45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cac
ca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID -
KATHPALIA
7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5
Digitally Signed d15570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c48796
5ff801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2026.03.09 19:00:49 -07'00'
By:NEETU N NAIR
Signing Date:09.03.2026
18:05:51
9. A copy of this order be immediately transmitted to the concerned Jail
Superintendent for informing the accused/applicant.
10. Of course, nothing observed in this order shall be read to the prejudice
of either side at the final stage of the trial. Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
GIRISH 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4af
ec45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cac
ca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID -
KATHPALIA
7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5
d15570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c48796
5ff801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2026.03.09 19:00:40 -07'00'
GIRISH KATHPALIA
(JUDGE)
MARCH 09, 2026
'rs'
BAIL APPLN. 1734/2025 Page 4 of 4 pages
