AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
MINI PUSHKARNA, J. (Oral):
By way of the present bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (“BNSS”), corresponding to Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (“CrPC”), the applicant, i.e., Ms. Nanni @ Nanhi, wife of late Mr. Akstar, seeks grant of regular bail in connection with the First Information Report (“FIR”) being FIR No. 0126/2025 dated 01st March, 2025, registered under Sections 109(1)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (“BNS”), at Police Station (“PS”) Civil Lines, North District, Delhi.
Mr. Ajay Vikram Singh, Additional Public Prosecutor (“APP”) for the State has placed on record a Status Report dated 13th January, 2026. The prosecution case, as emerging from the material placed on record, is as follows:
The present FIR was lodged at the instance of the complainant, i.e., Mr. Mohd. Rashid Mansoori, alleging that at about 01:30 AM on 01st March, 2025, when he was returning home from his work, he saw near Pal Dairy, Main Market, Majnu ka Tila, Delhi, accused no. 3, i.e., Mr. Shahrukh (already known to the complainant), armed with a blade, fighting an unknown boy.
When the complainant intervened in the said scuffle and tried to stop Mr. Shahrukh by taking away the blade, the blade broke. This agitated Mr. Shahrukh, who then attacked the complainant on his face with the broken blade and fled.
The complainant followed Mr. Sharukh to his residence at N-68/1519, Aruna Nagar, Majnu ka Tila, Delhi, where he was again attacked by him alongwith his father, i.e., Mr. Balram, and his younger brother, with bricks, stones and sticks.
It is also alleged that the applicant, i.e., the mother of Mr. Shahrukh, also came to the spot and instigated/provoked the accused persons to teach a lesson to the complainant and thus all the accused persons assaulted the complainant with an intention to kill him.
As a result, the complainant sustained multiple injuries and lost consciousness.
Subsequently, the applicant was arrested on 16th July, 2025.
Upon the completion of the investigation, in October, 2025, a Chargesheet came to be filed by the Investigating Officer (“IO”) under Sections 109(1) and 3(5) of the BNS.
The Nominal Roll placed on record by the concerned Jail Authorities, indicates that as on 12th January, 2026, the applicant has undergone incarceration for a period of 05 months and 27 days. Furthermore, the applicant, as of today, has been in custody for over a year.
Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant has not been imputed for inflicting any injury on the complainant. In fact, she has only been observed to be holding a stick, at the time of the alleged incident.
He submits that the complainant himself chased accused no. 3 to his residence after the initial scuffle. Therefore, it is a matter of trial to determine whether it was accused no. 3, who instigated the incident, or whether the complainant, being the aggressor, deliberately provoked accused no. 3.
He further submits that the applicant is visible in the CCTV footage. However, mere presence at the scene and holding a stick does not, by itself, establish participation in the alleged incident or any common intention to cause harm.
Learned counsel appearing for the applicant has informed this Court that the applicant has been in custody since 16th July, 2025, and the trial before the Additional Session Judge-02, Central, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi, in SC 762/2025 is at the stage of prosecution witness.
In addition, learned Additional Public Prosecutor (“APP”) for the State submits that there are total twenty-nine prosecution witnesses, and none of them have been examined, as yet.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court notes that though charges have already been framed, however, there are twenty-nine witnesses to be examined and as per the statement given before this Court, none of the witnesses have been examined as yet.
Accordingly, it is to be noted that the trial may take some time and therefore, it is unlikely to conclude in the near future.
This Court also notes the Status Report filed on behalf of the State whereby, it has categorically been stated that though the applicant is seen in the CCTV footage at the time of the incident, however, the applicant herself has not inflicted any injury upon the complainant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, the fact that prosecution evidence is yet to commence, and that the trial is unlikely to conclude in the near future, it is directed that the applicant be released on regular bail in connection with FIR No. 0126/2025, registered under Sections 109(1), 3(5) of the BNS, PS Civil Lines, North District, Delhi, subject to furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/-, with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Duty Magistrate/Trial Court, and to the following further conditions:
a. The applicant shall appear before the Trial Court on each and every date of hearing;
b. The applicant shall provide her permanent address to the IO, as also the address where she is residing during the pendency of the case. The applicant shall intimate the IO, and file an Affidavit before the Trial Court regarding any change in residential address;
c. The applicant shall provide her mobile number to the concerned IO/Station House Officer (“SHO”), which shall be kept in working condition at all times. The mobile number shall not be switched off or changed without prior intimation to the IO during the pendency of the trial;
d. The applicant shall report to the jurisdictional PS on every Monday at 09:00 AM, and shall be released, within two hours after completion of formalities;
e. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case or tamper with the evidence of the case, in any manner whatsoever. The IO is directed to monitor the situation and, in the event of any complaint being made, to inquire into the same in accordance with law;
f. The applicant shall not commit any offence during the period of her release.
The present bail application is allowed and accordingly disposed of in aforesaid terms.
It is clarified that any observations made in the present order are solely for the purpose of deciding the present bail application, and shall neither influence the trial proceedings, nor be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
Copy of the order be communicated to the concerned Jail Superintendent electronically for information and necessary compliance.