Delhi High Court
BAIL APPLN./3019/2026 of GAURAV SHARMA Vs STATE NCT OF DELHI THOURGH SHO PS HAZRAT NIZAMUDDIN RAILWAY STATION on 17 September 2026
HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010342412026 + BAIL APPLN. 3019/2026 GAURAV SHARMA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Nikhil Gupta, Ms. Ayushya Raj, Advs. versus STATE NCT OF DELHI THOURGH SHO PS HAZRAT NIZAMUDDIN RAILWAY STATION .....Respondent Through: Mr. Manoj Pant, APP with Mr. Varun
$~8
*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
#
CNR No. DLHC010342412026
+
BAIL APPLN. 3019/2026
GAURAV SHARMA
.....Petitioner
Through:
Mr. Nikhil Gupta, Ms. Ayushya Raj,
Advs.
versus
STATE
NCT
OF
DELHI
THOURGH
SHO
PS
HAZRAT
NIZAMUDDIN RAILWAY STATION
.....Respondent
Through:
Mr. Manoj Pant, APP with Mr. Varun
Kumar, Ms. Suman and Ms. Priyanka
Tyagi, Advs.
Insp. Sanjeev Kumar, P.S. HNRS,
Delhi.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MADHU JAIN
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
% 17.09.2026
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. The present application has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking regular bail in FIR No. 20/2026 registered at P.S. Hazrat Nizamuddin Railway Station under Sections 309(1)/310(2)/311/317(2)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 12.03.2026. It is submitted that the investigation stands completed and the chargesheet has already been filed. Learned counsel further submits that no recovery of the knife or the mobile phone has been effected from the petitioner. The alleged robbed mobile phone was recovered from co-accused Pankaj, whereas the knife was recovered from co-accused Imran. It is further submitted that, as per the statement of the complainant, the person wearing a black T-shirt and having long hair had taken the mobile phone, whereas the petitioner was wearing a yellow T-shirt.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is visible in the CCTV footage only on account of his presence with the co- accused persons, who are known to him. It is submitted that the petitioner is 22 years of age and has been in custody for approximately six months. It is further submitted that the charges are yet to be framed and the trial is likely to take considerable time.
5. Per contra, learned APP for the State opposes the grant of bail. He submits that the petitioner is clearly visible in the CCTV footage. He further submits that although the chargesheet has been filed, charges are yet to be framed. It is also submitted that the petitioner is involved in another case,
6. Heard, both the parties.
7. The allegations in the present case arise out of an incident of robbery in which the complainant was allegedly robbed of his mobile phone at knife point. The prosecution case is that the incident was captured on CCTV footage and that the petitioner, along with co-accused Pankaj and Imran, was arrested on 12.03.2026. The mobile phone was recovered from co-accused Pankaj and the alleged weapon of offence was recovered from co-accused Imran. The petitioner has remained in judicial custody since 12.03.2026. The charges are yet to be framed.
8. Having regard to the fact that the investigation stands completed, the chargesheet has been filed, the petitioner has remained in custody for approximately six months, and the trial is yet to commence, this Court is of the view that the petitioner can be admitted to bail, subject to appropriate conditions.
9. Accordingly, the present application is allowed. The petitioner is directed to be released on regular bail, subject to his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court/Link Court, and further subject to the following conditions: i. The petitioner shall not leave India without prior permission of the learned Trial Court. ii. The petitioner shall intimate the learned Trial Court by way of an affidavit and to the Investigating Officer regarding any change in residential address. iii. The petitioner shall appear before the learned Trial Court as and when the matter is taken up for hearing. iv. The petitioner is directed to give his mobile number to the Investigating Officer and keep it operational at all times. v. The petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, tamper with evidence or try to influence the witness in any manner.
10. The application is allowed and disposed of accordingly. Pending application, if any, also stand disposed of.
11. Needless to state, nothing mentioned hereinabove is an opinion on the merits of the case and any observations made are only for the purpose of the present bail application.
12. Copy of the order be sent to the concerned Jail Superintendent for necessary information and compliance.
13. The order be uploaded on the website forthwith. MADHU JAIN, J SEPTEMBER 17, 2026/prg/P