Dismissed¶23

Sunita v. State (Nct of Delhi)

Delhi HC13 Mar 2026BAIL APPLN./839/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Sunita v. State (NCT of Delhi), BAIL APPLN. 839/2026, Delhi High Court, Justice Manoj Jain, order dated 13.03.2026: premature/successive bail application dismissed as prior liberty under order dated 21.08.2025 (file afresh only if trial not concluded within 10 months) unexhausted; trial status 21 of 28 witnesses examined; liberty to re-approach preserved. Companion CRL.M.A. 6401/2026.

What did the court decide?

Since the 10-month period prescribed in the order dated 21.08.2025 has not elapsed and the trial is on course (21 of 28 witnesses examined), the Court finds no requirement to entertain the present bail application. ¶22

Sunita Vs State (Nct of Delhi) — Delhi HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

$~13

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- BAIL APPLN. 839/2026 & CRL.M.A. 6401/2026 SUNITA

¶4

.....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Pankaj Srivastava, Advocate.

¶6

versus

¶7

STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

¶8

.....Respondent Through: Ms. Priyanka Dalal, APP for the State with SI Sachin.

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN O R D E R % 13.03.2026

¶11

The applicant herein had earlier also filed a bail application which was registered as Bail Application No. 2582/2025. The abovesaid application was disposed of by the learned Predecessor Bench on 21.08.2025 directing as under :-

¶12

“ 1. The learned counsel for the applicant seeks liberty to withdraw

¶13

the present bail application and file afresh in case the trial does not conclude expeditiously.

¶14

2. The present bail application is dismissed as withdrawn with

¶15

liberty to the applicant to file an application afresh if the trial does not conclude within a period of 10 months. Pending application(s) also stand disposed of.”

¶16

The period of abovesaid 10 months is yet not over and it is not comprehensible as to why the present application has been moved.

¶17

Learned APP for State who appears on advance notice submits that out of 28 cited witnesses, the prosecution has already been able to examine 21 witnesses and every effort would be made to conclude the trial in the

¶18

BAIL APPLN. 839/2026 1

¶19

This is a digitally signed order.

¶20

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 17/03/2026 at 10:50:21

¶21

abovesaid time frame.

¶22

In view of the above, this Court does not find any requirement of entertaining the present bail application.

¶23

Present application stands dismissed.

¶24

Needless to say, the applicant would be at liberty to approach the Court in terms of the liberty granted to her as per order dated 21.08.2025.

¶25

MANOJ JAIN, J

¶26

MARCH 13, 2026/ss/sa

¶27

BAIL APPLN. 839/2026 2

¶28

This is a digitally signed order.

¶29

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 17/03/2026 at 10:50:21

Sunita v. State (Nct of Delhi)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunita v. State (Nct of Delhi)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raju Singh Vs the State (Nct of Delhi)

Vansh Vs State NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Mohd. Zia & Ors. Vs State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Vinay Malhotra @ Shivam Vs State NCT of Delhi

Pooja Sethi Vs the State of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Dushyant Singh & Ors. Vs State NCT of Delhi & Anr.