Allowed

Shivam @Sangram Singh v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Delhi HC23 May 2025BAIL APPLN./596/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Ms. Justice Neena Bansal Krishna granted regular bail to the petitioner, Shivam @ Sangram Singh, under Sections 483 and 528 of BNSS. Conditions included furnishing a bond, appearing as scheduled, providing mobile details, and not intimidating witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail granted subject to furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with one surety, appearing in court, and complying with conditions regarding location and communication with IOs.

Shivam @Sangram Singh Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi — Bail and Remand | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~6

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- BAIL APPLN. 596/2025

¶4

SHIVAM @ SANGRAM SINGH .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Mussaiyab Kazmi, Mr. Nazim Salam, Mr. Aaman Akhtar and Mr. Sameer, Advocates.

¶5

versus

¶6

STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Shoaib Haider, APP for State with SI Prashant Malik, PS: Laxmi Nagar and Prosecutrix in person.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA O R D E R

¶9

% 23.05.2025

¶10

First Bail Application under Section 483 read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNSS’) has been filed on behalf of the Petitioner Shivam @ Sangram Singh for grant of Regular Bail in FIR No. 0382/2023, under Sections 376D/328/344/323/354B/506/509/34 IPC and Sections 4/6 of ITP Act registered at PS: Laxmi Nagar.

¶11

The brief facts of the case are that on 23.07.2023, aforesaid FIR was registered on statement of the complainant, who stated that she resided in a rented accommodation and is a housewife. Her husband works as a laburer and admitted in a de-addiction Centre. During that time, a month ago, Petitioner Shivam @ Sangram Singh, who was a friend of her husband, met her and she requested him to get her a job so that she could met her household expenses. He took her to Neha and Nihariak, who assured her a job and kept her in their house. On the assurance that she would get the job of sweeping and mopping, she stayed there for 4-5 days. Thereafter, Aman

¶12

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/07/2025 at 00:16:52

¶13

@ Siraj, Shivam, Sonu forced her to do prostitution. When she opposed, they abused her and gave her brutal beatings by stuffing a cloth in her mouth and stripped her naked and tore her clothes. At the same place, they raped her in turns against her will and then threatened her that now she would have to become a prostitute and has to do what to say or else they would kill her. All of them trapped the Complainant into illegal prostitution everyday by unknown people.

¶14

On her complaint, FIR No. 0382/2023 was registered. Her statement was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., wherein, essentially her statement was that Petitioner had left her at the house of Neha and Niharika and later she stated that he used to beat her with belt and no other role has been attributed to the Petitioner. However, in her testimony as PW-1, she has against made a statement, which is more in consonance with the FIR.

¶15

It is submitted that the Petitioner had filed four bail applications, which have been dismissed by the learned Trial Court. 5. Bail is sought on the ground that FIR is lodged on a concocted story. The evidence collected by the police is not sufficient to prove the guilt of the Petitioner. The offence allegedly was committed in September, 2022 but FIR was registered on 23.07.2023. No specific allegations have been made in the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. The Petitioner is not likely to tamper with the evidence or to abscond, hence the bail is sought.

¶16

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that testimony of the prosecution witnesses has been concluded and the matter is listed for recording of the statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. on 24.05.2025. It is further submitted that the Petitioner is in custody since 18.08.2023 and he be admitted to bail.

¶17

¶18

Status report has been submitted on behalf of the State detailing the entire prosecution case.

¶19

Submissions heard and record perused .

¶20

The testimony of the prosecution witnesses has been recorded. There is no likelihood of tampering with the evidence. The Petitioner is in Judicial Custody since 18.08.2023. In the totality of circumstances, the Petitioner is granted Regular Bail, on the following terms and conditions :

¶21

a) The Petitioner/Accused shall furnish a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- and one surety of the like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. b) The Petitioner/Accused shall appear before the Court as and when the matter is taken up for hearing;

¶22

c) The Petitioner/Accused shall provide his mobile number/ changed mobile number to the IO concerned which shall be kept in working condition at all times;

¶23

d) The Petitioner/Accused shall not indulge in any criminal activity and shall not communicate or intimidate the witnesses. e) In case the Petitioner/Accused changes their residential address, the same shall be intimated to learned Trial Court and to the concerned I.O.

¶24

The copy of this Order be communicated to the concerned Jail Superintendent as well as the learned Trial Court.

¶25

The above Bail Application is accordingly disposed of.

¶26

NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.

¶27

MAY 23, 2025/ R

¶28

Shivam @Sangram Singh v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivam @Sangram Singh v. State Govt. of NCT of 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

P. C. Agrawal Vs State & Ors.

Shruti Goenka Vs Dhirendra Pandey & Anr.

Chetan Masand & Ors. Vs the State NCT of Delhi through SHO Ps Amar Colony & Anr.

Dhruv Vs the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Kamal @ Monu and Other Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Sagar Babbar Vs State (Gnct of Delhi)