Delhi High Court
BAIL APPLN./2469/2026 of SHAHRUKH @ SHAHRUKH LANGDA Vs STATE OF NCT OF DELHI on 14 September 2026
HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010279322026 + BAIL APPLN. 2469/2026 SHAHRUKH @ SHAHRUKH LANGDA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Sajid Ahmed and Mr. Firoz Iqbal Khan, Advs. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Ajay Vikram Singh, APP with Mr. Rohan Prakash and Ms.
$~5
*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
#
CNR No. DLHC010279322026
+
BAIL APPLN. 2469/2026
SHAHRUKH @ SHAHRUKH LANGDA
.....Petitioner
Through:
Mr. Sajid Ahmed and Mr. Firoz Iqbal
Khan, Advs.
versus
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI
.....Respondent
Through:
Mr. Ajay Vikram Singh, APP with
Mr. Rohan Prakash and Ms. Saumya
Saraswat, Advs.
ASI Chandra Pal
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
% 14.09.2026
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. The present application is preferred on behalf of the Applicant, namely Shahrukh @ Shahrukh Langda, under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNSS’), seeking grant of regular bail in FIR No. 198/2025, registered at Police Station Jahangir Puri, under Sections 21/25/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (“NDPS Act”).
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that only an intermediate quantity of 233.77 grams of heroin was recovered from the petitioner, who has been in custody for more than one year.
4. He further submits that the chargesheet has already been filed and charges have also been framed. However, there are more than 20 prosecution witnesses to be examined and, therefore, the trial is likely to take considerable time. It is accordingly prayed that the petitioner be released on bail.
5. Per contra, learned APP for the State submits that there are three more FIRs registered against the petitioner. In one of the said FIRs, the petitioner was granted bail; however, he subsequently jumped bail and was declared a proclaimed offender in that case. It is submitted that there is a likelihood of the petitioner repeating such conduct in the present case as well.
6. He further submits that, along with the petitioner, one more accused was arrested and the total quantity recovered is commercial in nature. Therefore, the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act would apply and the petitioner is not entitled to grant of bail. In support of his submissions, learned APP relies upon the judgment of this Court in Awadhesh Yadav v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi, BAIL APPLN. 1692/2023, decided on 29.11.2023.
7. A perusal of the record shows that there are three prior antecedents against the present petitioner. It appears that, though the petitioner was granted bail in those cases, he misused the liberty so granted and has allegedly committed another offence, which is the subject matter of the present case.
8. Learned APP for the State further submits that the disability certificate relied upon by the petitioner is of the year 2022, whereas the present FIR was registered in the year 2025. Despite suffering from the said disability, it appears that the petitioner has no hesitation in committing the offence, particularly an offence under the NDPS Act. No ground for grant of bail is made out.
9. Accordingly, the present application is dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of.
10. The order be uploaded on the website forthwith. MADHU JAIN, J SEPTEMBER 14, 2026/b/rm