Bilal Ansari Vs the State of NCT of Dlehi

¶1

$~4

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

BAIL APPLN. 4356/2025 & CRL.M.A. 33705/2025 BILAL ANSARI .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Santosh Paul, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Saleem, Mr. Khursheed, Mr. Kartik Gupta, Ms. Aditi Rai, Advocates.

¶4

versus

¶5

THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Ms. Manjeet Arya, APP. Mr. Naseem Akhtar, Advocate for complainant

¶6

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN O R D E R

¶7

% 18.03.2026

¶8

By way of the present bail application, the applicant seeks anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No. 363/2025 dated 09.10.2025, registered at Police Station DBG Road, District Central, Delhi, for offences punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 [“IPC”].

¶9

I have heard Mr. Santosh Paul, learned Senior Counsel for the applicant, Ms. Manjeet Arya, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, and Mr. Naseem Akhtar, Advocate for the complainant/prosecutrix. 3. The allegation in the FIR is that the prosecutrix, who was then 25 years of age, met the applicant at a gym in 2023. It is alleged that the applicant promised to marry the prosecutrix. The applicant is further alleged to have taken the prosecutrix to a hotel on 21.10.2023 and

¶10

BAIL APPLN. 4356/2025

¶11

Page 1 of 5

¶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 19/03/2026 at 12:27:21

¶13

established forcible physical relations with her. According to the prosecutrix, such instances of forcible physical relations, on the false pretext of marriage, occurred on several occasions, the last being in September 2025. It is also alleged in the FIR that the applicant has committed a similar offence with another woman and that he had cheated the prosecutrix of money and jewellery.

¶14

Mr. Paul submits that the applicant was granted interim protection by order dated 14.11.2025, and that he has joined the investigation. The chargesheet has since been filed without arrest of the applicant, in view of the interim protection granted by this Court. 5. Ms. Arya, upon instructions from the Investigating Officer [“IO”], confirms that the chargesheet has been filed. However, she submits that a supplementary chargesheet will be filed upon receipt of the report of the Forensic Science Laboratory, in respect of the applicant’s mobile phone. 6. Mr. Akhtar draws my attention to the order dated 04.12.2025, which records an allegation of the prosecutrix that, under the interim protection granted by the Court, the applicant continues to harass her. By the aforesaid order, the IO was directed to verify this allegation.

¶15

The IO has submitted a status report dated 18.01.2026 in this connection. The said status report is not on record. A copy of the same is handed over in Court and is taken on record. The contents of this status report are as follows:

¶16

“2. In pursuant to the directions of the Hon’ble Court, the IO/SI Kiran Yadav conducted the enquiry and examined the complainant who stated that on 30.11.2025 at about 04:30 PM, while she was going towards her home from Ashok Park Main, petitioner was also passing from there by riding a scooty near the drain bridge at Tulsi Nagar, Inderlok, Delhi where he threatened her saying as, “ Ek baar bail hone

¶17

BAIL APPLN. 4356/2025

¶18

Page 2 of 5

¶19

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 19/03/2026 at 12:27:21

¶20

de, tujhe aure tere poore khandaan ko dekh lunga. ”

¶21

3. On this, the complainant filed a written complaint regarding the said incident at Police Post Inderlok, Delhi seeking action against the petitioner. She also stated that she has moved an application before the Ld. Concerned Court for obtaining CCTV footage of the incident dated 30.11.2025.

¶22

4. In this regard, an enquiry has also been conducted from the Enquiry Officer of Police Post Inderlok, HC Naved, who informed that the available CCTV footage has already been provided to the complainant. The said footage, captured by a police camera, shows that:

¶23

A) At 04:21:14 PM, the complainant ‘N’ is seen travelling in a rickshaw, fully covered in a burqa, moving towards Inderlok.

¶24

B) At 04:20:10 PM, the accused Bilal Ansari is seen riding a scooty towards Ashok Park Main.

¶25

5. It was further informed that no CCTV camera is installed at the exact spot where the alleged face-to-face incident is staged to have been occurred and therefore, no CCTV footage of the alleged confrontation is available.

¶26

6. The enquiry officer, HC Naved further stated that during enquiry, no concrete or corroborative evidence could be found to substantiate the allegation that the accused threatened the complainant on 30.11.2025.”

¶27

Although the allegations in the present case include Section 376 of the IPC, which is doubtless a grave offence, the chargesheet has already been filed while the applicant was under the interim protection of this Court. The allegations pertain to a sexual relationship of approximately two years on the false pretext of marriage. The judgments of the Supreme Court, inter alia, in Samadhan v. State of Maharashtra and Anr. [2025 SCC OnLine SC 2528] and Mahesh Damu Khare v. State of Maharashtra [(2024) 11 SCC 398], deal with similar cases which pertain to prolonged sexual relationships.

¶28

As far as the prosecutrix’s allegation of harassment and threats by the applicant is concerned, the additional status report only corroborates

¶29

BAIL APPLN. 4356/2025

¶30

Page 3 of 5

¶31

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 19/03/2026 at 12:27:21

¶32

that the prosecutrix and the applicant were present at the same location on a public road at approximately the same time. However, no concrete evidence has been found to substantiate the allegation of any contact between the parties. Insofar as this aspect is concerned, I am, therefore, of the view that it would not be appropriate, at this stage, to deprive the applicant of his liberty, solely on the basis of the allegation made by the prosecutrix. However, it is made clear that if similar allegations are substantiated in the future, the same shall constitute a ground for cancellation of the bail granted to the applicant.

¶33

In view of the above, it is directed that, in the event of arrest in connection with FIR No. 363/2025 registered under Section 376 of the IPC at Police Station DBG Road, Delhi, the applicant shall be released on bail, subject to furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the IO/Station House Officer concerned, and subject to the following conditions:

¶34

A. The applicant will furnish his mobile number to the IO, and shall keep the said mobile phone running and always switched on. The mobile number shall not be changed or switched off without prior intimation to the IO;

¶35

B. The applicant will give his residential address to the IO, and will not change his residential address without prior intimation to the IO;

¶36

C. The applicant shall attend the Trial Court on each and every date of hearing;

¶37

D. The applicant shall not directly/indirectly try to get in touch with the prosecutrix or her family, or tamper with the evidence;

¶38

BAIL APPLN. 4356/2025

¶39

Page 4 of 5

¶40

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 19/03/2026 at 12:27:21

¶41

E. The applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the concerned Trial Court;

¶42

F. The applicant shall not commit any offence during the pendency of the proceedings.

¶43

It is made clear that any violation of the conditions mentioned hereinabove shall entail cancellation of the bail granted to the applicant. 12. The bail application, alongwith the pending application, is disposed of in the above terms.

¶44

It is further clarified that the observations made herein are solely for the purpose of adjudication of the present bail application and shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case, nor shall they prejudice the rights and contentions of the parties at any stage of the proceedings.

¶45

PRATEEK JALAN, J

¶46

MARCH 18, 2026 “Bhupi/JM”/

¶47

BAIL APPLN. 4356/2025

¶48

Page 5 of 5

¶49

This is a digitally signed order.

¶50

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 19/03/2026 at 12:27:21

Bilal Ansari v. the State of NCT of Dlehi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bilal Ansari v. the State of NCT of Dlehi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ameruddin @ Ammiruddin & Ors. Vs the State NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Ccl Hxxxx through His Mother Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Sh Irvinder Pal Singh Vs State Gnct of Delhi & Anr.

MD Sarfaraz Vs State of NCT of Delhi

Piyush Sharma and Others Vs State of NCT of Delhi and Another

Sh.Laxman Kumar Indoria & Ors. Vs State of Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.