Allowed

Rahul v. the State (Govt. of NCT Delhi)

Delhi HC10 Jul 2025BAIL APPLN./1779/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail sought in an NDPS case involving recovery of 58.6 grams heroin, an intermediate quantity, from premises jointly occupied by the applicant and a co-accused. The court found the voice notes vague, CDRs unhelpful, and no cogent evidence linking the applicant to the offence, and allowed bail on a personal bond of Rs. 10,000 with one surety.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond of Rs.10,000/- with one surety in like amount to satisfaction of trial court.

Rahul Vs the State (Govt. of NCT Delhi) — Narcotics (NDPS) | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~3

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of Decision: 10.07.2025

¶4

BAIL APPLN. 1779/2025 RAHUL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. C.M. Sangwan, Advocate

¶5

versus THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT DELHI) .....Respondent Through: Mr. Ritesh Kr. Bahri, APP with Ms. Divya Yadav, Advocate for the State

¶6

CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

¶7

J U D G M E N T (ORAL)

¶8

In pre-lunch session, the matter was passed over as neither the counsel for accused/applicant nor the IO appeared. In this post-lunch session, learned counsel for accused/applicant and the IO have appeared. I have heard learned APP for State and learned counsel for accused/applicant.

¶9

The accused/applicant seeks regular bail in case FIR No. 71/2025 of PS Burari for offence under Section 8/21 NDPS Act.

¶10

Broadly speaking, the allegation against the accused/applicant is recovery of 58.6 grams heroin, which is an intermediate quantity, so bar under Section 37 NDPS Act does not apply. The accused/applicant was arrested on 23.03.2025 and remains in jail since then, though for three days he was granted interim bail after which he surrendered.

¶11

BAIL APPLN. 1779/2025 Page 1 of 3 pages GIRISH Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA KATHPALIA Date: 2025.07.10 17:45:17 +05'30'

¶12

Signature Not Verified

¶13

Digitally Signed By:NEETU N NAIR Signing Da te:1 0.07.2025 18:16:34

¶14

On last date, learned APP had alleged that there are Call Detail Records between the accused/applicant and co-accused Simran and voice notes reflecting the complicity of the accused/applicant in the offence. Today in pre-lunch session, the IO did not appear, so matter was passed over awaiting those CDRs and voice notes. Now, the IO has produced the voice notes in a pendrive which is played in court room. The voice notes are completely vague and nothing can be deduced from the same, much less complicity of the accused/applicant in the crime. As regards CDRs, the same have not been shown and even otherwise, according to prosecution also, the accused/applicant and co-accused Simran are living together, so their telephonic connectivity does not lead to any inference of complicity in crime.

¶15

So far as the alleged recovery of contraband is concerned, the same was not in consequence of any disclosure statement, but a search carried out in the premises, occupied jointly by the accused/applicant and suspect Simran.

¶16

In other words, currently there is no cogent evidence to connect the accused/applicant with the alleged offence.

¶17

Considering the above circumstances, the application is allowed and the accused/applicant is directed to be released on bail subject to his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court.

¶18

BAIL APPLN. 1779/2025

¶19

Page 2 of 3 pages GIRISH Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA KATHPALIA Date: 2025.07.10 17:45:34 +05'30'

¶20

Signature Not Verified

¶21

Digitally Signed By:NEETU N NAIR Signing Da te:1 0.07.2025 18:16:34

¶22

Copy of this order be sent to the concerned Jail Superintendent for being conveyed to the accused/applicant forthwith.

¶23

GIRISH KATHPALIA

¶24

Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA Date: 2025.07.10 17:45:47 +05'30'

¶25

GIRISH KATHPALIA (JUDGE)

¶26

JULY 10, 2025/ ry

¶27

BAIL APPLN. 1779/2025

¶28

Page 3 of 3 pages

¶29

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:NEETU N NAIR Signing Da te:1 0.07.2025 18:16:34

Rahul v. the State (Govt. of NCT Delhi)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul v. the State (Govt. of NCT Delhi)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rinku Vs the State of NCT of Delhi

Vinod Singh Bisht Vs the State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Hari Singh Vs State (Nct of Delhi)

Ashish Kumar Vs the State (Gnct of Delhi)

Mohd. Navi @ Mohd. Nabi @ Nadim Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Harish Kumar @ Sachin and Anr. Vs State NCT of Delhi and Anr.