Delhi High Court
BAIL APPLN./1695/2026 of SHAILENDER KUMAR PALL Vs THE STATE NCT OF DELHI on 2 September 2026
HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010191262026 + BAIL APPLN. 1695/2026 SHAILENDER KUMAR PALL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Kush Sharma, Ms. Niharika Tanwar, Mr. Anmol Gupta, Mr. Atharva Gaur, Mr. Abdul Vahid, Advs. versus THE STATE NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Ajay Vikram
$~10
*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
#
CNR No. DLHC010191262026
+
BAIL APPLN. 1695/2026
SHAILENDER KUMAR PALL
.....Petitioner
Through:
Mr.
Kush
Sharma,
Ms.
Niharika
Tanwar,
Mr.
Anmol
Gupta,
Mr.
Atharva
Gaur,
Mr. Abdul
Vahid,
Advs.
versus
THE STATE NCT OF DELHI
.....Respondent
Through:
Mr. Ajay Vikram Singh, APP
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MADHU JAIN
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
1
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
% 02.09.2026
1. This hearing has been conducted through hybrid mode.
2. The present application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as 'BNSS'), in connection with FIR No. 289 of 2026 registered at Police Station Samaipur Badli, District Outer North, Delhi.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the charge-sheet in the aforementioned FIR has already been filed and, therefore, the interim protection granted to the petitioner vide order dated 04.05.2026, be made absolute.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner also relies upon an order of a Coordinate bench of this court in BAIL APPLN. 4227/2025, Yogesh Dahiya v State of NCT of Delhi decided on 24.07.2026.
5. Learned APP for the State, on instructions, submits that the petitioner has joined and fully cooperated with the investigation as and when required by the Investigating Officer (IO). The IO, who is present, also confirms the same.
6. In Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra. (2011) 1 SCC 694, the Supreme Court, while considering the principles governing grant of anticipatory bail, observed as under: “89. It is imperative for the courts to carefully and with meticulous precision evaluate the facts of the case. The discretion must be exercised on the basis of the available material and the facts of the particular case. In cases where the court is of the considered view that the accused has joined investigation and he is fully cooperating with the investigating agency and is not likely to abscond, in that event, custodial interrogation should be avoided.” [Emphasis Supplied]
7. Accordingly, the interim protection granted to the petitioner vide order dated 04.05.2026 is made absolute.
8. Accordingly, in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail on furnishing a bail bond to the sum of Rs.25,000/- with a surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the concerned Station House Officer (SHO) / IO, subject to the following conditions:
i. The Applicant shall keep the mobile number furnished by him to the IO operational at all times.
ii. The Applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, influence any witness or tamper with the evidence in any manner.
iii. The Applicant shall promptly intimate any change in his residential address or contact details to the concerned Investigating Officer/SHO.
iv. The Applicant shall join the investigation as and when required by the Investigating Officer.
9. A copy of this order be sent to the concerned learned Trial Court for necessary information and compliance.
10. The order be uploaded on the website forthwith. MADHU JAIN, J SEPTEMBER 2, 2026/prg/PG