Tohid v. The State (NCT Of Delhi)
$~4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 5068/2025 TOHID .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Suraj Prakash Sharma, Adv.
(Through VC) versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through:
Mr. Raghuinder Verma, APP for the State with Mr. Aditya Vikram Singh, Ms.Upasna Bakshi and Ms.
Niketa Manish, Advs.
Mr. Anuj Kapoor, Adv. for the complainant SI- Himanshu, PS: Alipur.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE
O R D E R
% 26.05.2026 1.
By virtue of the present bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), the applicant seeks grant of regular bail in FIR No.287/2025 dated 21.05.2025 registered under Sections 105/238(B)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) at PS.: Alipur.
2.
At the outset, learned counsel for the complainant has handed over a copy of the complaint made by wife of the deceased to PS.: Narela Industrial Area, Delhi on 06.08.2025, which is taken on record. The same depicts the threat faced by her from the family of the applicant much after The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
the commission of the offence.
3.
Briefly put, as per FIR, on 19.05.2025, pursuant to an intimation, the police officials reached the spot, where they found the deceased. During investigation, it was revealed that on the intervening night of 18/19.05.2025, the deceased along with the applicant and the other coaccused persons were travelling on motorcycle, whence the motorcycle lost balance and banged into the divider nearby. This resulted in serious injuries to the deceased. However, instead of taking the deceased to the Hospital or informing the police, the accused persons allegedly carried and abandoned him at a secluded place, where he later succumbed to his injuries, i.e. the spot where the police found the deceased. Subsequently, after conclusion of the investigation, the charge-sheet was filed before the learned Trial Court on 17.07.2025.
4.
It is under these facts and circumstances, this Court has heard the learned counsel for the applicant, the complainant and learned APP for the State as also perused all the documents on record. 5.
Though the applicant herein has no prior antecedents as also the charge-sheet has been filed, however, it cannot be ignored that the CCTV footage shows that the applicant was present on the spot at the time of the accident and the motorcycle has been recovered at his instance. As also that the applicant, along with the co-accused persons were instrumental in removing the body of the deceased instead of taking corrective measures of taking him to the Hospital or informing the Police. It is also relevant that the wife of the deceased has made a complainant after the arrest of the applicant about being threatened by his family members. 6.
As such, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
Serious concerns about his influencing the witnesses, hampering with the trial and tampering with evidence may arise if granted bail. 7.
Accordingly, in view of the afore-going, since no grounds for grant of regular bail are made out, the present application is dismissed. 8.
Needless to say, expression of view(s) on the merits, if any, are solely for the purposes of adjudication of the present application and shall have no bearing on the overall case/ trial involved. SAURABH BANERJEE, J MAY 26, 2026/Ab The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.