logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide
24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 DHC 020 print Preview print Next print
Court : High Court of Delhi
Case No : Bail Appln. No. 4975 of 2025 & CRL.M.A. No. 38364 of 2025
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
Parties : Hitender Yadav @ Raju Versus State NCT Of Delhi
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: Jitendra Sethi, Senior Advocate, Hemant Gulati, Shobit Dimri, Bharat, Divyam Guar, Advocates. For the Respondent: Ajay Vikram Singh, APP.
Date of Judgment : 08-01-2026
Head Note :-
Comparative Citation:
2026 DHC 118,
Summary :-
1. Statutes / Acts / Rules Mentioned:
- Section 302/307 IPC
- Section 27/30 Arms Act

2. Catch Words:
- Interim bail
- Medical documents
- Personal bond

3. Summary:
The accused applied for interim bail citing his mother’s spinal surgery scheduled for 15‑16 January 2026. The investigating officer verified the medical documents as genuine. The prosecution argued that the accused’s two adult sons could care for the mother, but the defence highlighted that the sons are students and the accused had previously been granted interim bail on similar grounds. The court, after hearing both sides, ordered the release of the accused on interim bail, conditioned upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs.20,000 with a surety, for the period 13‑27 January 2026. The order also required the accused to surrender immediately if the surgery is further postponed. The order was to be communicated to the jail superintendent for execution.

4. Conclusion:
Petition Allowed
Judgment :-

Judgment (Oral)

1. The accused/applicant seeks interim bail in case FIR No. 420/2022 of PS Subhash Place for offence under Section 302/307 IPC read with Section 27/30 Arms Act on the ground of surgery of his mother.

2. Learned APP assisted by IO/Inspector Balram files status report, which is accepted across the board, to be scanned and made part of the record.

3. Learned senior counsel for accused/applicant contends that this is a fit case to grant at least interim bail for three weeks to the accused/applicant as he has to take care of his ailing mother, who has to undergo some spinal surgery on 15.01.2026 and 16.01.2026. It is further submitted by learned senior counsel that medical documents have already been furnished to the IO, who has verified the same. Learned senior counsel has explained that earlier, the surgery was scheduled for 25.12.2025 as mentioned in paragraph 5 of the application but the same could not be carried out due to medical complications of mother of the accused/applicant.

4. Learned APP submits that medical documents of mother of the accused/applicant have been verified and the same are found genuine. But, it is submitted by learned APP that accused/applicant has two sons aged 23 and 19 years, who can take care of mother of the accused/applicant.

5. Learned senior counsel submits that the sons of the accused/applicant are students. Besides, it is also explained that earlier, for same grounds the accused/applicant was granted interim bail three times for two weeks each but he duly surrendered when the surgery got postponed.

6. After some discussion, as requested by both sides, the application is disposed of directing release of the accused/applicant on interim bail subject to his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court for the period from 13.01.2026 to 27.01.2026 and in case the surgery of mother of the accused/applicant again gets deferred and is not performed on 16.01.2026, the accused/applicant shall immediately surrender before the concerned Jail Superintendent. Accompanying application stands disposed of.

7. A copy of this order be immediately transmitted to the concerned Jail Superintendent for compliance.
 
  CDJLawJournal