logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide

24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 DHC 247 print Preview print print
Court : High Court of Delhi
Case No : BAIL APPLN. No. 641 of 2026 & CRL.M.A. No. 10634 of 2026
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
Parties : Lokesh @ Lucky Versus State Of NCT Of Delhi
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: Ishpreet Singh, Sumit Sharma, Advocates. For the Respondent: Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP.
Date of Judgment : 22-04-2026
Head Note :-
Arms Act - Section 25/27 -

Comparative Citation:
2026 DHC 3340,
Judgment :-

Judgment (Oral)

1. The accused/applicant seeks regular bail in case FIR No. 115/2021 of Police Station Wazirabad for offence under Section 392/394/397/411/34 IPC and Section 25/27 of Arms Act.

2. Once again, despite last opportunity, prosecution has not ensured that status report should come on record. It seems that the State is not seriously interested in opposing this bail application.

3. I have heard learned counsel for accused/applicant and learned APP for State assisted by IO/Inspector Anjani Kumar Singh.

4. Broadly speaking, allegation against the accused/applicant is that he along with his co-accused committed robbery of a mobile phone from a pedestrian, who was talking over the phone while walking. According to prosecution, the accused/applicant was armed with a knife while the co- accused was armed with a pistol and in the course of snatching of the mobile phone, the accused/applicant allegedly hit the complainant de facto with butt of the knife.

5. Learned counsel for the accused/applicant submits that he is in custody since 17.03.2021 and trial is still continuing. It is also submitted that the complainant de facto already stands examined before the trial court, so this is a fit case to release the accused/applicant on bail.

6. Learned APP opposes the bail application mainly on the ground of antecedents of the accused/applicant. It is submitted that the accused/applicant is involved in four more cases including a case of assault on police.

7. As regards the antecedents, it is submitted by both sides that the accused/applicant is on bail in those cases. I also find force in the submission of learned counsel for accused/applicant that he could have inflicted serious injury, if he intended, by stabbing with the knife.

8. Considering the overall circumstances, especially the period of incarceration already undergone by the accused/applicant and pendency of trial, I consider it a fit case to release the accused/applicant on bail.

9. Therefore, the 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. Accompanying application stands disposed of.

10. Copy of this order be sent to the concerned Jail Superintendent for being conveyed to the accused/applicant.

 
  CDJLawJournal