Priyanka v. The State Govt. Of NCT Of Delhi
$~54 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + PRIYANKA .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Om Pal Singh with Mr. Geet Kumar, Advocates.
versus THE STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through:
Mr. Aashneet Singh, APP for the State with Insp. Sudhir Kumar and Insp.
Sanjay Kumar, PS Budh Vihar.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN
O R D E R
% 11.05.2026 CRL.M.A. 14789/2026 (exemption) Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions. 1.
Applicant seeks regular bail in case FIR No.217/2020 dated 18.08.2020 registered at P.S. Budh Vihar for commission of offences under Sections 302 IPC.
2.
The abovesaid FIR was registered on the basis of the complaint made by the brother of the deceased.
3.
The name of deceased is Sh. Krishan Tyagi. Applicant herein is his wife.
4.
As per prosecution story, she was not happy with her marriage, primarily, due to the fact that there was considerable age difference between her and the deceased. She developed illicit relationship with accused Veeru Singh @ Veeru Verma @ Beeru as well as with his younger brother (juvenile offender). According to prosecution, some sedatives were supplied by accused Veeru Singh, which were administered to the deceased by the other The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
co-accused and deceased was strangulated by the applicant with the assistance of her juvenile co-accused.
5.
The accused is in custody since 19.08.2020 and, so far, 14 out of 26 witnesses have been examined.
6.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as far as co-accused Veeru Singh is concerned, he was enlarged on regular bail by this Court on 17.09.2025, particularly, while also keeping in mind the fact that there was inordinate delay in completing the trial. Though fact remains that while he was enlarged on bail, the Court also kept in mind the limited role ascribed to him in the conspiracy in question.
7.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as far as juvenile offender is concerned, unfortunately, he is no more alive and the proceedings qua him stand abated, which fact has not been disputed by the learned Addl. P.P. for the State, on being instructed in this regard by the Investigating Officer.
8.
Nominal Roll has been requisitioned which indicates her custody, as on 11.05.2026 to be of 5 years, 08 months and 23 days. 9.
Admittedly, all the material public witnesses have already been examined and since 12 more witnesses are yet to be examined, there is no likelihood of trial getting completed in near future. 10.
Undoubtedly, the case at hand is of murder, and the gravity of the offence involved cannot be disregarded, but at the same time, the long incarceration period and there is no likelihood of trial getting completed in near future, this Court, in order to uphold the objective enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, in its true letter and spirit, finds no reason to disallow the bail. Reference be also made to Deepak Tiwari vs. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
State (NCT of Delhi): 2024 SCC OnLine Del 7810, Praveen Rathore v. State of Rajasthan: 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1268 and order dated 24.02.2026 in BAIL APPLN.3794/2024 titled Saif Ali @ Saif Khan vs. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi.
11.
Keeping in mind the overall facts and circumstances of the case and also appreciating the fact that applicant is a lady with no other involvement in any other case, she is hereby admitted to bail on her furnishing personal bond in a sum of Rs. 30,000/- with one local surety of like amount, subject to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court/CJM/Duty Magistrate with following conditions:- (i) She shall not directly or indirectly contact, threaten, or influence any prosecution witnesses.
(ii) She shall appear before the Trial Court on every date of hearing, unless exempted by the Court.
(iii) She shall provide her mobile number to the Investigating Officer and keep it operational at all times. (iv) The learned Trial Court shall be at liberty to get the addresses of the accused as well as proposed surety verified before accepting the bonds.
12.
The application stands disposed of in aforesaid terms. 13.
A copy of this order be sent to the concerned Court and also to the Jail Superintendent for necessary information and compliance. 14.
Copy of the order be given dasti under the signatures of Court Master. MANOJ JAIN, J MAY 11, 2026/st/sk The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.