Saplu v. State Of Govt. Of NCT Of Delhi
$~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 1048/2025 SAPLU .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Nitin Kumar, Advocate.
versus STATE OF GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through:
Mr. Ajay Vikram Singh, APP for the State.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
O R D E R
% 23.09.2025 1.
An Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed on behalf of the Applicant/Petitioner Saplu for grant of Regular Bail in case FIR No.230/2024 under Section 21/25 NDPS Act registered at Police Station Crime Branch-North. 2.
It is submitted in the Bail Application that it is a false case in which he has been implicated on the basis of concocted story. He is innocent and is in judicial custody since 19.11.2024.
3.
The brief facts of the case are that on 18.07.2024 at about 11 A.M on the basis of a secret information, raid was conducted at premises bearing No.A-97, Ramgarh, Jahangir Puri, Delhi. The landlord Jitender Jain informed that the house was on rent with the Applicant, who was called by him on his mobile phone. The Applicant arrived at the premises and opened the house. On search, in all 175 gm. of heroin was recovered from the house.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
4.
The Bail is sought on the ground that the investigations are complete and the Chargsheet has been filed in the Court. 5.
There is no concrete material to show that the house was taken on rent by the Applicant. The quantity recovered is intermediate and the statutory bar of Section 37 is not attracted. He had been granted Interim Bail by the Court on 05.12.2024 and he surrendered timely. He did not misuse the liberty.
6.
Further, no independent witnesses were joined at the time of the alleged recovery. The family of the Applicant is dependent upon him as he is the sole bread earner. He is not a flight risk and there is no scope of tampering with the witnesses. He is a peace loving citizen with clean antecedents and there is no likelihood of his absconding. 7.
A prayer is, therefore, made that Bail be granted. 8.
The Status Report has been filed on behalf of the State, wherein it has been explained that 170 gms of heroin was recovered from the premises in which the Applicant was a tenant. All the mandatory provisions were complied and thereafter, the Applicant was arrested. The Bail is opposed on the ground that it is a heinous crime of drug peddling/smuggling. There is clear connected between the Applicant and the co-accused Sonu, as has been established by the CDR analysis. The Applicant is not involved in any other case, but the co-accused Sonu has been found involved in multiple cases. There is an inter-State drug trafficking unit. The co-accused Salim is yet to be arrested.
9.
Reliance is placed on State of Kerala vs. Rajesh (2020) 12 SCC 122 to assert that considering the seriousness of the offence and the deleterious effects and impact on the Society, the Bail be rejected. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
Submissions heard and record perused.
10.
The Applicant is in judicial custody since 19.11.2024. The Chargesheet already stands filed. There are 19 Prosecution witnesses. The Charges have been framed, but no Prosecution Witness has been examined. The quantity recovered from the Applicant was intermediate. 11.
Considering the totality of circumstances, the accused is granted Regular Bail, on the following terms and conditions: a) The petitioner/accused shall furnish a personal bond of Rs.35,000/- and one surety of the like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.
b) The petitioner/accused shall appear before the Court as and when the matter is taken up for hearing;
c) The petitioner/accused shall provide his mobile number/changed mobile number to the IO concerned which shall be kept in working condition at all times;
d) The petitioner/accused shall not indulge in any criminal activity and shall not communicate or intimidate the witnesses. e) In case the petitioner/accused changes their residential address, the same shall be intimated to learned Trial Court and to the concerned I.O.
12.
The copy of this Order be communicated to the concerned Jail Superintendent as well as to the learned Trial Court. 13.
The above Bail Application is accordingly disposed of. NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J SEPTEMBER 23, 2025/va The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.