Md @ Aman v. The State Of NCT Of Delhi
$~4 *
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ MD @ AMAN .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Aftab Hussain and Ms. Anita, Advocates.
versus THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through:
Ms. Shubhi Gupta, APP for State.
Inspector Surendra Singh, P.S.:
Kalindi Kunj.
Mr. A.K. Dey, Advocate for complainants.
Complainants in-person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI
O R D E R
% 17.02.2026 By way of the present petition filed under section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, the petitioner seeks grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.700/2025 dated 07.12.2025 registered under sections 103(1)/109(1)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 at P.S.: Kalindi Kunj, Delhi.
2.
Notice on this petition was issued on 09.01.2026. 3.
Status report dated 13.02.2026 has been filed. 4.
Pursuant to the intimation sent vidé order dated 09.01.2026, learned counsel is present on behalf of the deceased and 02 other injured victims, who are the neighbours of the deceased. 5.
The court has heard learned counsel for the petitioner; learned APP for the State; and learned counsel appearing for the deceased and injured victims.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
6.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits, that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the matter by the police only for the reason that he had made a statement to a local TV channel called 'Tez Tarrar' (posted on 'X' through a handle called @sagarmalik1985) pointingout the illegalities being committed in their jurisdiction; and that, apart from this, there is no role ascribed to the petitioner in the subject FIR.
7.
In this behalf, counsel draws attention to a certain screenshot of posts appearing on 'X', which narrate that the petitioner has had to pay a price because he made a complaint against the officers of the concerned police station.
8.
On the other hand, Ms. Gupta draws attention to the contents of the subject FIR, as well as to Status Report dated 13.02.2026, to submit that there are statements recorded by the I.O., including the statements of Arun and Neeraj (the injured victims), which narrate that a person named 'Lefty' and the petitioner (also called 'MD') had instigated the co-accused persons stating that whoever does not support them, will have to meet the fate that was meted-out to some other persons by knifing them a month ago.
9.
Other things apart, learned APP points-out, that the petitioner is a known Bad Character of the area; and has 05 other criminal implications, as set-out in the status report. 10.
Learned counsel for the deceased/victims submits, that the petitioner is infact the head of a gang of persons (including the co-accused) who threaten and commit offences upon the residents of the area. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
11.
The present matter concerns the death of one Vikas, as well as of serious injuries having been inflicted on the two other injured victims, for which they are still undergoing treatment. 12.
In the circumstances, learned APP submits that the I.O. requires custodial interrogation of the petitioner.
13.
Upon a conspectus of the foregoing; and considering the nature of the allegations, as well as the fact that the petitioner is stated to have other criminal implications as detailed in the status report, this court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 14.
The petition is accordingly dismissed.
15.
Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed-of. ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J FEBRUARY 17, 2026/ak The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.