Sameer Chaudhary v. State (Govt. Of NCT Of Delhi)
$~10&11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 471/2026 MOHD JUNED @ ASHRAF @ FORI .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. S N Qureshi, Advocate.
versus STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through:
Mr. Mukesh Kumar, APP.
+ BAIL APPLN. 487/2026 &CRL.M.A. 3712/2026 SAMEER CHAUDHARY .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. S N Qureshi, Advocate.
versus STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through:
Mr. Mukesh Kumar, APP.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN
O R D E R
% 27.03.2026 1.
Both the applicants seek anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 397/2025 dated 23.12.2025, registered at Police Station Seelampur, for commission of offences under Sections 109(1)/3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding Sections 307/34 IPC).
2.
When their applications were taken up by this Court on 06.02.2026, they were directed to join investigation and it was also ordered that upon their assisting the investigating agency, let no coercive process be taken against them.
3.
Learned APP for the State submits that both the applicants have already joined the investigation and at present, they are not required for any investigational purpose. It is submitted that when they were interrogated about the weapon of the offence, they had claimed that they had thrown the same away and despite best efforts, the same could not be searched out. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
4.
The FIR in question was registered on the basis of the report lodged by complainant Rashid @ Chotu who alleged that on 22.12.2025, he was attacked by six persons, including both the applicants herein and was hit with iron rod on his head. Fact remains that injured was discharged from the hospital, same day.
5.
According to learned counsel for applicants, the abovesaid FIR is a counter-blast on account of previous enmity. It is submitted that two other co-accused i.e. Yakub Chaudhary and Naim have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court (in BAIL APPLN. 433/2026 and BAIL APPLN. 472/2026) vide orders dated 06.02.2026 and 02.02.2026, respectively, and other two are on regular bail and since the applicants herein have already joined the investigation, the present applications may be allowed.
6.
Undoubtedly, when both the applicants had prayed for anticipatory bail before the learned Court of Sessions, they were given interim relief and despite the fact that the report of the investigating agency was, specifically, to the effect that they had joined the investigation, the bail was declined while observing that they had not joined the investigation. 7.
Since the applicants are not required for any investigational purpose or for custodial interrogation, keeping in mind the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the interim relief granted to the applicants is, hereby, made absolute with the following directions: - (i) Applicants shall continue to join investigation as and when so directed.
(ii) In the event of arrest, the arresting officer would release them on bail on their furnishing personal bond and surety bond in a sum The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
of Rs. 25,000/- each.
8.
Applications stand disposed of in aforesaid terms. 9.
Pending application also stands disposed of.
MANOJ JAIN, J MARCH 27, 2026/sw/sa The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.