Dismissed¶17

Vicky @ Vikky v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Delhi HC6 Apr 2026BAIL APPLN./1323/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delhi High Court; Justice Saurabh Banerjee; BAIL APPLN. 1323/2026; regular bail denied/dismissed; repeat bail application; no change of circumstances; six-month condition from earlier order not elapsed; BAIL APPLN. 4484/2025 dismissed as withdrawn; Trial Court dismissal dated 11.03.2026; FIR No.381/2023 dated 29.07.2023; PS Aman Vihar; Sections 363/368/328/376/34 IPC; Sections 6/21 POCSO Act; Section 483 BNSS 2023; prosecution reply before Trial Court; no precedent cases cited.

What did the court decide?

This Court was not convinced with the merits-based arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. ¶11

Vicky @ Vikky Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Delhi HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶17

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail in FIR No.381/2023 (PS Aman Vihar) on the merits of the case, counsel having relied primarily on the prosecution's reply filed before the Trial Court. +1 more

¶10

Court's answer

This Court was not convinced with the merits-based arguments advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶11

Ratio / Principle

The prosecution's reply before the learned Trial Court could not come to the aid of the applicant, as the assertions made and grounds raised in the application were without any change of circumstances, and counsel was unable to demonstrate any change in circumstances post the Trial Court's dismissal of the last bail application vide order dated 11.03.2026.

¶14

Key takeaways

Since the applicant approached the Court again on the very same facts and circumstances and it was admitted that the six-month period stipulated in the earlier order (BAIL APPLN. 4484/2025) had not yet elapsed, there was no reason to proceed for hearing the present application.ratio¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail application under Section 483 BNSS 2023 seeking regular bail in FIR No.381/2023 dated 29.07.2023, PS Aman Vihar (Sections 363/368/328/376/34 IPC and Sections 6/21 POCSO), dismissed. Counsel argued solely on merits, relying on the prosecution's reply filed before the Trial Court; the Court was not convinced. The reply could not aid the applicant as the grounds were raised without any change of circumstances following dismissal of the last bail application by the Trial Court on 11.03.2026, and counsel demonstrated no change in circumstances thereafter. An earlier bail application (BAIL APPLN. 4484/2025) had been dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to re-approach if the trial was not concluded within six months; it was admitted that the six-month period had not elapsed. As the application rested on the very same facts and circumstances, the Court found no reason to proceed with its hearing and dismissed it.

¶1

$~73

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- BAIL APPLN. 1323/2026

¶4

VICKY @ VIKKY .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Medhavi Tyagi, Mr. Utsav Kumar, Mr. Devender Kumar and Mr. Bikram Vishal Kumar, Advocates

¶5

versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Satish Kumar, APP for the State with Mr. Aditya Vikram Singh, Advocate alongwith SI Pradeep Kumar, P.S. Aman Vihar

¶6

CORAM:

¶7

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE

¶8

O R D E R % 06.04.2026

¶9

By virtue of the present application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ( BNSS ), the applicant seeks regular bail in FIR No.381/2023 dated 29.07.2023, PS: Aman Vihar, Delhi registered under Sections 363/368/328/376/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ( IPC ) and Sections 6/21 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO).

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has addressed her arguments on merits when, primarily, she has relied upon the reply filed by the prosecution before the learned Trial Court and submits that the same are sufficient for this Court to grant regular bail to the applicant.

¶11

However, this Court is not convinced with her arguments on merits,

¶12

This is a digitally signed order.

¶13

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 08/04/2026 at 11:32:37

¶14

as also particularly since the said reply before the learned Trial Court can also not come to the aid of the applicant since the assertions made, grounds raised in the present application as also the arguments addressed thereon are without any change of circumstances. In fact, learned counsel for the applicant has been unable to demonstrate anything which could show that there existed any change in circumstances post the dismissal of the applicant’s last bail application by the learned Trial Court vide order dated 11.03.2026. Moreover, vide order dated 03.12.2025 filed alongwith the present application reflects that the applicant had earlier also filed an application seeking regular bail before this Court by way of BAIL APPLN. 4484/2025, which was though dismissed as withdrawn, but with the following observations:-

¶15

“2. Let the trial be concluded expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months. In case the trial is not concluded within the stipulated time, the petitioner is at liberty to approach this Court at the appropriate stage…”

¶16

For the above reasons, as also since the applicant has approached this Court by way of the present application on the very same facts and circumstances, as also since it is admitted case that the aforesaid period of six months has not elapsed yet, there is no reason to proceed for hearing the present application.

¶17

Accordingly, the present bail application is dismissed.

¶18

SAURABH BANERJEE, J

¶19

APRIL 6, 2026/ dy

¶20

This is a digitally signed order.

¶21

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 08/04/2026 at 11:32:37

Vicky @ Vikky v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vicky @ Vikky v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kamal Prakash Vs State NCT of Delhi

Yusuf Ali Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Vikas Kumar Vs Rakhi Saini

Sadik through Parokar Ruksana Vs the State of NCT of Delhi

Ms. Inna Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Pankaj Kandpal Vs the State NCT of Delhi and Anr.