Delhi High Court
CRL.M.C./7840/2025 of GAGAN BHASIN Vs STATE NCT OF DELHI & ORS. on 23 September 2026
HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010867272025 + CRL.M.C. 7840/2025 GAGAN BHASIN .....Petitioner Through: None versus STATE NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Satish Kumar, APP with Mr. Abhishek Singh Yadav, Adv. Mr. Ujwal Ghai, Mr. Chaitanya Malhotra, Ms. Yashi
$~1
*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CNR No. DLHC010867272025
+
CRL.M.C. 7840/2025
GAGAN BHASIN
.....Petitioner
Through:
None
versus
STATE NCT OF DELHI & ORS.
.....Respondents
Through:
Mr. Satish Kumar, APP with Mr.
Abhishek Singh Yadav, Adv.
Mr. Ujwal Ghai, Mr. Chaitanya
Malhotra, Ms. Yashi Pandey, Advs.
for R-2 and 3.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
O R D E R
%
23.09.2026
1. The present petition has been filed seeking cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to respondent nos. 2 and 3 and setting aside of the impugned order dated 09.10.2025 passed by the learned ASJ-02, West, Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi, whereby the application seeking cancellation of bail was dismissed.
2. The petitioner is the complainant/victim in FIR No. 130/2025 registered at P.S. Hari Nagar under Sections 110(3) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 [‘BNS’].
3. Anticipatory bail was granted to respondent no. 2 vide order dated 23.04.2025, subject to, inter alia, the condition that he would not interfere with the witnesses or evidence. The benefit of anticipatory bail was subsequently extended to respondent no. 3.
4. The petitioner thereafter approached the learned Sessions Court seeking cancellation of the anticipatory bail, alleging, inter alia, that respondent no. 2 had visited the residence of a key eyewitness on 05.06.2025 and had thereby attempted to influence the witness in violation of the conditions of bail. The said application was dismissed by the said Court vide impugned order dated 09.10.2025.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent nos. 2 and 3 submits that, during the pendency of the present petition, the chargesheet has been filed, and cognizance has been taken by the learned Magistrate. He submits that the matter is listed before the learned Magistrate on 29.09.2026, when it is likely to be committed to the Court of Session.
5.1. He further submits that respondent nos. 2 and 3 have duly cooperated with the investigation and have regularly appeared before the learned Magistrate. He states that respondent nos. 2 and 3 undertake to continue to regularly appear before the learned trial court. It is submitted that, in these circumstances, the apprehension expressed by the petitioner regarding any attempt on the part of the respondents to influence the witnesses is not made out.
6. Learned APP, on instructions from the Investigating Officer [‘I.O.’], submits that the allegation regarding respondent nos. 2 and 3 attempting to influence a key witness, namely, Mr. Rakesh Kumar, has not been substantiated during investigation. He submits that no person by the name of Mr. Rakesh Kumar could be identified in the neighbourhood during the course of investigation.
6.1. He further submits that the chargesheet has since been filed and that the three complainants are cited as witnesses to the incident in the said chargesheet.
7. None appears on behalf of the petitioner.
8. The submission of the I.O. as regards non-identification or non- traceability of the alleged witness Mr. Rakesh Kumar is a material fact having bearing on this petition, as it is substantial basis for seeking cancellation of the bail.
9. In view of the non-appearance on behalf of the petitioner, the present petition is dismissed in default for non-prosecution.
10. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J SEPTEMBER 23, 2026/mt/AM