Chandra Has Maurya v. The State NCT Of Delhi
$~6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 730/2026 CHANDRA HAS MAURYA .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Zeeshan Anjum, Advocate versus THE STATE NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through:
Mr. Naresh Kumar Chahar, APP for the State with SI Yashveer Sharma and SI Sunita, PS Pul Prahaladpur.
CORAM:
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA
O R D E R
% 24.04.2026 1.
By way of the present application, the applicant is seeking grant of regular bail in case arising out of FIR bearing no. 442/2024, registered at Police Station Govind Puri, Delhi, for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 64(1)/61(2)/351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereafter 'BNS').
2.
Briefly stated, the allegations levelled by the prosecutrix are that one Rajesh had called her on the pretext of arranging a job in a hospital and asked her to meet him at Khajuri Chowk, from where he allegedly took her to the office of present applicant/accused. On the next day, when she contacted the applicant, she was called to Kashmiri Gate and thereafter to Vidhan Sabha, where the accused/applicant allegedly came in his car, took her to his office, and later to the house of co-accused Zarina. It is alleged The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
that she was taken into a room, wrongfully confined, threatened, and forced to cooperate, and when she resisted, she was threatened that the co-accused waiting outside would kill her if she raised an alarm. Thereafter, the applicant allegedly forcibly established physical relations with her against her will and threatened to implicate her in a false case if she disclosed the incident, following which she managed to contact her sister and the police. On these allegations, the present FIR came to be registered. 3.
The learned counsel appearing for the applicant argues that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that there is a delay of about 48 hours in the registration of the FIR after the medical examination of the prosecutrix. It is further submitted that the applicant has been in judicial custody for the last 11 months and no other criminal case is pending against him. It is, therefore, prayed that the applicant be released on regular bail.
4.
The learned APP for the State, on instructions from the Investigating Officer (IO) concerned, submits that the prosecutrix is not traceable and despite best efforts, she could not be traced. It is further submitted that, therefore, the prosecution has dropped her from the list of witnesses before the learned Trial Court.
5.
This Court has heard arguments addressed on behalf of the applicant as well as the State and has perused the material available on record. 6.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the fact that the applicant has been in judicial custody for more than 11 months and that the prosecutrix is not traceable and has, in fact, been dropped as a witness before the learned Trial Court, this Court is inclined to grant regular bail to the applicant on furnishing a personal bond The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
in the sum of ₹15,000/- with one surety of the like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court/Successor Court/Link Court/Duty Judge concerned, on the following terms and conditions: i) The applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the concerned Court and if the applicant has a passport, he shall surrender the same to the concerned trial court. ii) In case of change of residential address/contact details, the applicant shall promptly inform the same to the concerned Court and IO/SHO concerned.
iii) The applicant shall appear regularly before the learned Trial Court, unless exempted.
iv) The applicant shall not communicate with, or come into contact with the complainant or any of the prosecution witnesses, or tamper with the evidence of the case.
7.
Accordingly, the present bail application stands allowed and is disposed of.
8.
It is, however, clarified that nothing expressed hereinabove shall tantamount to an expression of opinion on merits of the case. 9.
The order be uploaded on the website forthwith. DR. SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J APRIL 24, 2026/zp TD The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.