BAIL APPLN./2115/2026 of NISHA DESWAL Vs STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR on 23 July 2026

O R D E R

%

23.07.2026

1. By way of the present applications under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 [“BNSS”], the applicants seek anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No. 0290/2026, registered under Sections 74, 78, 115, 126(2), 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 [“BNS”], at Police Station Mundka, Outer District, Delhi.

2. The applicant in BAIL APPLN. 2115/2026 was granted interim protection by order dated 29.05.2026, which reads as follows: “3. The prosecution case, as enumerated in the status report filed before the Sessions Court on 22.05.2026, is as follows:

a. FIR No. 290/2026 was registered on 12.05.2026 on the basis of a Police Control Room call on 11.05.2026 alleging that the complainant had been assaulted by her neighbours, and that her clothes had been torn.

b. The medical report also recorded an alleged history of assault by 5-6 neighbours near the complainant’s house, during which she was allegedly hit, kicked, punched, and slapped on the face and head, and her clothes were torn. The medical examination conducted at Sanjay Gandhi Hospital revealed bruises on her arms and left leg, as well as scratches on her breast. c. The complainant gave a statement, alleging that the incident occurred on 11.05.2026 at about 7:00 PM, when she discovered that her neighbour, Raj, had disconnected the water supply to her house and diverted the pipeline to his own residence. Upon the complainant and her husband seeking an explanation, Raj allegedly started abusing her, pushed her, and slapped her. Other members of his family, including the present applicant, are alleged to have arrived at the scene and started hitting the complainant on the face. When she attempted to leave the location, it is alleged that her path was blocked by Urmila and Divya, and that she was grabbed and punched by Raj and Divya. Raj is further alleged to have slapped her on the chest, torn her clothes, and acted indecently, while Urmila allegedly grabbed her from behind.

d. Further, even after the complainant’s husband pulled her to safety, Raj continued to abuse her, Urmila began hitting her, and Divya also abused her and threatened to kill her. e. It is further alleged that the applicant and three other accused persons caught hold of the complainant and continued to assault her. f. It is stated that, even after the arrival of the Beat Constable, Raj attempted to assault the complainant and continued to abuse her and her daughter.

g. The complainant handed over CCTV footage of the incident to the Investigating Officer (IO). According to the status report, four women and one man can be seen assaulting the complainant in the footage. The man was identified as Raj, who is seen punching the complainant on her chest. The status report identifies the women in the CCTV as “Jyoti, Divya, and Monika, apart from the applicant Urmila”. It is further noted that Urmila was served with a notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS directing her to join the investigation on 17.05.2026, but she failed to do so.

4. Mr. R.S. Malik, learned counsel for the applicant, submits that the allegations in the FIR are largely directed against Raj, who is the applicant’s father-in-law. He further submits that the allegations relatable to Section 74 of the BNS are also exclusively against Raj, whereas the applicant’s alleged involvement is limited to slapping the complainant.

5. Ms. Arya, however, submits that the case concerns a serious incident, involving assault on a woman, and that co-accused Raj is yet to be apprehended. Upon instructions from the IO, who is present in Court, she submits that the contents of the status report filed before the Sessions Court were incorrect, insofar as they identified the four women seen in the CCTV footage as Jyoti, Divya, Monika, and Urmila. It is submitted that the applicant is also one of the persons seen in the CCTV footage and that the name "Jyoti" was incorrectly mentioned.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that this is a fit case for the grant of interim protection, subject to the applicant joining the investigation. As noted above, there is considerable ambiguity in the prosecution's case regarding the identification of the applicant in the CCTV footage, including as to whether the applicant is seen in the footage at all. Further, the direct allegations against the applicant are limited to assaulting the complainant, by slapping her. Other allegations, including those relatable to Section 74 of the BNS, have not prima facie, been attributed to the applicant at all.

7. Subject to the applicant joining the investigation, as and when required, and cooperating with the IO, it is directed that the applicant shall not be arrested in connection with the subject FIR until the next date of hearing before this Court.

8. In view of the inconsistencies in the status report filed before the Sessions Court and the submissions made before this Court today, an updated status report be filed before this Court prior to the next date of hearing. The said report shall be countersigned by the concerned Assistant Commissioner of Police.”

3. Following the aforesaid order, the other applicants were also granted interim protection by orders dated 03.06.2026.

4. Mr. Yudhvir Singh Chauhan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, has handed over status reports in each of the four matters, which are taken on record. The status reports state that all the applicants have joined the investigation, and that there is no allegation of non-cooperation against any of them.

5. I am further informed that the anticipatory bail application of a co- accused, being BAIL APPLN. 2317/2026, has been allowed today by a coordinate Bench of this Court.

6. Mr. Chauhan submits that the applicants may be directed to continue to join and cooperate with the investigation.

7. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is directed that, in the event of their arrest in connection with FIR No. 0290/2026 dated 12.05.2026, registered under Sections 74, 78, 115, 126(2), 351(2) and 3(5) of BNS, at Police Station Mundka, Outer District, Delhi, the applicants shall be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- each, with one surety each in the like amount, subject to the following conditions:

a) The applicants shall join and cooperate with the investigation as and when required by the Investigating Officer;

b) The applicants shall furnish their respective mobile numbers to the Investigating Officer and shall ensure that the said mobile phones remain operational and switched on at all times. The applicants shall not change their respective mobile numbers or switch off their mobile phones without prior intimation to the Investigating Officer;

c) The applicants shall furnish their respective residential addresses to the Investigating Officer and shall not change the same without prior intimation to the Investigating Officer;

d) The applicants shall not, directly or indirectly, contact or attempt to contact any witness, nor shall they tamper with the evidence in any manner whatsoever;

e) The applicants shall not leave the country without the prior permission of the concerned Trial Court; and

f) The applicants shall not commit any offence during the pendency of the proceedings.

8. The bail applications stand disposed of in the above terms.

9. It is clarified that the observations made herein are solely for the purpose of adjudication of the present bail applications, and shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the cases, nor shall they prejudice the rights and contentions of the parties at any stage of the proceedings. PRATEEK JALAN, J JULY 23, 2026 Tg/SD/