Shivam v. State Govt Of Delhi
$~7&8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 09.01.2026 + BAIL APPLN. 4564/2025 & CRL.M.A. 35248/2025 YASH .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Rohit Gupta, Advocate versus STATE GOVT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through:
Mr. Utkarsh, APP for State with SI Vibhu Sharma, PS Subzi Mandi Mr. Raghav Mehdiratta, Advocate for complainant de facto + BAIL APPLN. 4567/2025 CRL.M.A. 35255/2025 SHIVAM .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Rohit Gupta, Advocate versus STATE GOVT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through:
Mr. Utkarsh, APP for State with SI Vibhu Sharma, PS Subzi Mandi Mr. Raghav Mehdiratta, Advocate for complainant de facto CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
J U D G M E N T
(ORAL) 1.
The accused/applicants seek anticipatory bail in case FIR No. Page 1 of 3 pages 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec45569af3962c6fb4835d4 35f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638, serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570996b40f80cbd2eee6 0402c487965ff801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA Date: 2026.01.09 17:38:00 -08'00'
509/2025 of PS Subzi Mandi for offence under Section 110/351(2)/3(5) of BNS.
2.
At the outset, learned APP on instructions of IO/SI Vibhu Sharma, submits that subsequent to further investigation in the case, the police does not want to arrest the accused/applicants.
3.
However, learned counsel for complainant de facto submits that mother and wife of the accused Shivam have been harassing the family of the complainant de facto regarding which he filed a complaint as well. Be that as it may, the prosecution is not with the complainant de facto on this aspect.
4.
Broadly speaking, the accused/applicants are cousins of the complainant de facto and their fathers are embroiled in property dispute. The incident in question seems to have occurred in the heat of moment, whereby two groups, one consisting of the complainant de facto and his companions, while the other consisting of the accused/applicants clashed with each other leading to registration of cross FIRs. The present complainant de facto also is an accused in the cross FIR. The allegation against accused Yash is that he assaulted the victim with fists and kicks, while the allegation against accused Shivam is that he hit a stone on the head of the victim. MLC of the victim Nitin reflects laceration over forehead approximately 2x1 cm and bruise over right side of the neck. The accused/applicants were protected from arrest by order dated 01.12.2025 of the predecessor bench.
Page 2 of 3 pages 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec45569af3962c6fb48 35d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638, serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570996b40f80cbd2 eee60402c487965ff801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA Date: 2026.01.09 17:38:14 -08'00'
5.
Considering the overall circumstances described above, there is no occasion to deprive the accused/applicants liberty. Therefore, both anticipatory bail applications are allowed and it is directed that in the event of their arrest, the accused/applicants shall be released on bail, subject to each of them furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the IO/SHO. Accompanying applications also stand disposed of.
2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec45569 af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638, serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d1557099 6b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA Date: 2026.01.09 17:38:27 -08'00'
GIRISH KATHPALIA (JUDGE) JANUARY 9, 2026/as Page 3 of 3 pages