Pradeep Sharma v. State (NCT of Delhi)

Delhi High Court · 14 Jan 2026 · 2026:DHC:309
Girish Kathpalia
BAIL APPLICATION 4874/2025
2026:DHC:309
criminal appeal_allowed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court granted regular bail to an accused previously absconding, emphasizing that prolonged detention without framing charges and the nature of the offence justify release subject to strict conditions.

Full Text
Translation output
BAIL APPLICATION 4874/2025
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 14.01.2026
BAIL APPLN. 4874/2025, CRL.M.A. 37557/2025 & CRL.M.A.
37558/2025 PRADEEP SHARMA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Chandan Mishra, Advocate.
VERSUS
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Hemant Mehla, APP for State
WITH
Inspector Faizan Ghani and SI
Pankaj Kumar, PS Jyoti Nagar.
Mr. Prashant Sharma, Advocate for Complainant de facto
WITH
Complainant de facto in person.
CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
JUDGMENT
(ORAL)

1. The accused/applicant seeks regular bail in case FIR No. 02/2019 of PS Jyoti Nagar for offence under Section 498A/406/34 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act.

2. I have heard learned counsel for accused/applicant and learned APP for State as well as learned counsel for complainant de facto.

3. Broadly speaking, in this case for offence under Section 498A/406/34 IPC, the accused/applicant (husband of complainant de facto) was summoned by the trial court on filing of chargesheet. The accused/applicant appeared before the trial court and was admitted to bail. But thereafter, the accused/applicant stopped appearing and was ultimately declared proclaimed offender after necessary procedural steps. On 28.09.2025, the accused/applicant was arrested and continues to be in custody till date.

4. Learned counsel for accused/applicant submits that no purpose would be served by keeping the accused/applicant in jail endlessly as till date, even charge has not been framed. It is further submitted that once granted bail, the accused/applicant would arrange money for welfare of his minor child.

5. Learned APP for State and learned counsel for complainant de facto oppose the bail application solely on the ground of past conduct of the accused/applicant in fleeing justice.

6. Of course, conduct of the accused/applicant in absconding earlier is to be deprecated. But the accused/applicant cannot be kept in jail endlessly. As mentioned above, the accused/applicant is in jail since 28.09.2025 and till date, even charge has not been framed. Nature of the offence also has to be kept in mind while dealing with the issue of bail in circumstances as recorded above.

7. Considering the overall situation, the application is allowed and the accused/applicant is directed to be released on bail subject to his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one local surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court and also subject to the condition that the accused/applicant shall ensure regular appearance before the trial court, failing which no further indulgence shall be extended. Accompanying applications also stand disposed of.

8. A copy of this order be immediately transmitted to the concerned Jail Superintendent for informing the accused/applicant.

GIRISH KATHPALIA (JUDGE) JANUARY 14, 2026