Delhi High Court

CRL.M.C./7545/2026 of SAYED MAZHER Vs STATE NEW DELHI & ORS. on 13 October 2026

HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010483672026 + CRL.M.C. 7545/2026 & CRL.M.A. 31505/2026 SAYED MAZHER .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Naveen Malhotra, Mr. Ritvik Malhotra, Mr. Nilansh Malhotra, Advocates. versus STATE NEW DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Yudhvir

$~123

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

CNR No. DLHC010483672026

+

CRL.M.C. 7545/2026 & CRL.M.A. 31505/2026

SAYED MAZHER

.....Petitioner

Through:

Mr. Naveen Malhotra, Mr. Ritvik

Malhotra, Mr. Nilansh Malhotra,

Advocates.

versus

STATE NEW DELHI & ORS.

.....Respondents

Through:

Mr. Yudhvir Singh Chauhan, APP for

the State with Mr. Narender Kumar,

Advocate along with SI Jitendra, PS

CR Park.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

O R D E R

%

13.10.2026

1. The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), seeking modification of one of the conditions imposed by this Court vide order dated 14th October, 2025, in BAIL APPLN. 3925/2025, while exercising jurisdiction under Section 484 of the BNSS read with Section 528 thereof.

2. The condition sought to be modified reads as follows: “ii. The Applicant shall, once in every three months, mark his attendance before the local police station, i.e., Mahalinga Puram, PO Nungam Bakkam, Sub District Chennai - 60034 and this intimation shall be given to the jurisdictional P.S.”

Page 1 of 2

3. Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is also an accused in another case in which the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, vide order dated 24th June, 2026, passed in BAIL APPLN. 1201/2026, has granted him bail subject to the condition that he shall not leave the State of Maharashtra without prior permission of the Trial Court.

4. It is, thus, contended that the aforesaid condition imposed by the Bombay High Court would conflict with the condition imposed by this Court, requiring the Petitioner to mark his attendance at the concerned police station in Chennai. It is further submitted that, under the aforesaid order dated 24th June, 2026, the Petitioner is also required to mark his attendance at the DCB, CID, Anti Extortion Cell Unit, Mumbai, on the first day of each calendar month between 11:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m., till the conclusion of the trial.

5. Having considered the submissions advanced and the conditions imposed by the respective Courts, this Court finds it appropriate to modify condition (ii) of the order dated 14th October, 2025. Accordingly, the Petitioner shall mark his attendance at the DCB, CID, Anti Extortion Cell Unit, Mumbai, in terms of the order dated 24th June, 2026, and shall intimate the Investigating Officer concerned in FIR No. 193/2022, registered at P.S. Chittranjan Park, Delhi, of his compliance with the said condition.

6. In the event the trial arising out of FIR No. 52/2022, registered in Mumbai, concludes before the conclusion of the trial arising out of FIR No. 193/2022, registered at P.S. Chittranjan Park, Delhi, the Petitioner shall, thereafter, resume marking his attendance at the local police station in Chennai, in terms of condition (ii) of the order dated 14th October, 2025.

7. The petition is disposed of in the above terms, along with the pending application(s), if any.

SANJEEV NARULA, J OCTOBER 13, 2026/ab

Page 2 of 2

Loading citations and judicial treatment…

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead