Delhi High Court
Parmanad @ Parveen vs State Nct Of Delhi on 9 March, 2026
$~4
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 09.03.2026
+ BAIL APPLN. 3959/2025
PARMANAD @ PARVEEN .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Varun Deswal and Mr. Danish
Khan, Advocates.
versus
STATE NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for State
with ACP Raj Kumar.
CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
J U D G M E N T (ORAL)
1. The accused/applicant seeks regular bail in case FIR No. 183/2024 of
PS Crime Branch for offence under Section 20(B)(ii)(C)/29 NDPS Act and
Section 209 BNS.
2. Conduct of Delhi Police in this case is shocking, to say the least.
Despite last detailed order (dated 16.01.2026), the concerned ACP (Mr.
Satender Mohan, who filed the status report annexing tampered document)
has opted not to appear. In his place, ACP Mr. Raj Kumar has come but
submits that the concerned ACP Mr. Ajay Kumar has retired three months
BAIL APPLN. 3959/2025 Page 1 of 5 pages
Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA
GIRISH
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec4
Signature Not Verified 5569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca,
ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID – 7047638,
KATHPALIA
postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d155
Digitally Signed 70996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801e26
fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
By:NEETU N NAIR Date: 2026.03.09 18:59:35 -07’00’
Signing Date:09.03.2026
18:05:51
back and despite efforts, they could not contact the concerned ACP. Mr. Raj
Kumar, ACP is obviously unable to explain the tampering. For convenient
understanding, order dated 16.01.2026 is extracted below:
“1. The accused/applicant seeks regular bail in case FIR No.
183/2024 of PS Crime Branch for offence under Section
20(B)(ii)(C)/29 NDPS Act.
2. In furtherance of last order, learned counsel for
accused/applicant has produced a copy of bail order of the
transporter Jeewan. That bail seems to have been granted solely
for the reason that grounds of arrest were not communicated to
the accused/applicant.
3. I further heard learned counsel for accused/applicant. The
rigors of Section 37 NDPS Act would operate in this case as the
quantity of ganja allegedly recovered from the
accused/applicant was 46 kg.
4. One of the serious arguments advanced on behalf of
accused/applicant is that according to the entire prosecution
case and the FIR, the alleged recovery was carried out at 08:00
pm on 12.09.2024 and prior to that, FSL team was requisitioned
for inspection of the spot and case property. The said requisition
letter (page 123 of paperbook) is dated 13.09.2024. Further,
even the crime scene report (page 124 of paperbook) shows the
crime scene inspection being carried out from 10:00 pm to
01:30 am of the next day and the same was carried out vide DD
No. 254A dated 13.09.2024.
5. Learned APP has submitted the status report, which is
accepted across the board to be scanned and made part of
record. Page 7 of the status report is another copy of the
requisition letter bearing interpolation of the date in which the
date has been converted from 13 to 12. Learned APP is unable
to explain as to when this correction was carried out and in
what manner. It is submitted by learned APP that the IO/SI
Amolakh has not appeared and in his place SI Meenu has
appeared but is not aware of the facts.
6. In normal circumstances, this in itself should be a reason to
release the accused/applicant on bail. But keeping in mind the
gravity of charge and operation of Section 37 NDPS Act, I do
not want to deprive the prosecution an opportunity to explain.
7. On the next date, the concerned ACP shall personally appear
BAIL APPLN. 3959/2025 Page 2 of 5 pages
Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIAGIRISH
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
Signature Not Verified 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec455
69af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH
COURT OF DELHI,CID – 7047638,KATHPALIA
postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
Digitally Signed serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570
996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801e26fa,
By:NEETU N NAIR cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2026.03.09 18:59:25 -07’00’
Signing Date:09.03.2026
18:05:51
with the IO to explain the circumstances.
8. Relist on 09.03.2026 in Advance List.”
3. Learned APP for State submits that the recovered quantity of ganja
being commercial quantity, in view of rigours of Section 37 NDPS Act, the
accused/applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. As regards the
aforementioned discrepancy of dates, learned APP submits that it was just
an inadvertent error insofar as the recovery in question took place on
12.09.2024 only and the date of Daily Diary Entry was wrongly mentioned
in the FSL requisition letter.
4. As mentioned above, allegation against the accused/applicant is that at
his instance 46 kg ganja was recovered and the same being commercial
quantity, rigours of Section 37 NDPS Act would come into play.
5. According to prosecution case, the alleged recovery was carried out at
about 08:00pm on 12.09.2024 and prior to the alleged recovery, the IO
requisitioned the FSL team on the spot for inspection of the spot and the
case property. Obviously, for an anticipated recovery dated 12.09.2024, the
FSL requisition letter would be dated 12.09.2024 or prior to that day, and
not subsequent to that day. As reflected from FIR itself, the FSL team
reached the spot and inspected the spot on 12.09.2024 prior to the alleged
recovery of the contraband. But the said requisition letter (page 123 of the
paperbook) is dated 13.09.2024. There is no explanation from prosecution
side for this discrepancy.
BAIL APPLN. 3959/2025 Page 3 of 5 pages
Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
Signature Not Verified GIRISH 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4a
fec45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626ca
cca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID –
KATHPALIA
7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5
Digitally Signed d15570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c48796
5ff801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
By:NEETU N NAIR Date: 2026.03.09 18:59:12 -07’00’
Signing Date:09.03.2026
18:05:51
6. Submission of learned APP that it was just an inadvertent error of date
of the Daily Diary Number 254A, which crept in the FSL requisition letter
fails to convince. Liberty of an individual cannot be allowed to be curtailed
in such slipshod manner.
7. Besides, the FSL in Crime Scene Report dated 20.02.2025 (page 124
of the paperbook) mentioned the date of inspection as 13.09.2024, that too at
more than one place in that report, which is in stark contrast with rest of the
prosecution case, according to which the crime scene was inspected by the
FSL team prior to the alleged recovery of the contraband on 12.09.2024.
8. Worse is that when the status report was called for, the concerned
ACP Mr. Satender Mohan (and not Mr. Ajay Kumar as submitted by ACP
Mr. Raj Kumar appearing today) submitted status report dated 08.12.2025,
annexing with the same a copy of the FSL requisition letter after
interpolating the date of DD No.254A from 13.09.2024 to 12.09.2024. That
interpolated letter is at page 7 of the status report dated 08.12.2025. It is Mr.
Satender Mohan, ACP, who was called upon to appear and explain the
circumstances because it is his report which accompanied the FSL
requisition letter bearing tampered dates. But neither ACP Satender Mohan
has appeared to explain nor any explanation has been advanced from the
side of prosecution as to why he has not appeared. Rather, as mentioned
above, the ACP present today contended that the erstwhile ACP was Mr.
Ajay Kumar, who has retired. As if, after retirement the police officers go
beyond the control of the department.
BAIL APPLN. 3959/2025 Page 4 of 5 pages
Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA
GIRISH
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec45
Signature Not Verified 569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca,
ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID – 7047638,
KATHPALIA
postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d1557
Digitally Signed 0996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801e26f
a, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
By:NEETU N NAIR Date: 2026.03.09 18:59:02 -07’00’
Signing Date:09.03.2026
18:05:51
9. I find substance in the submission of learned counsel for
accused/applicant that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the
accused/applicant has been falsely framed in this case and is not guilty of the
offence for which he has been arrested, and he remains in jail since
13.09.2024. Of course, on these aspects, the learned trial court shall take
independent view at final stage on the basis of evidence adduced.
10. Therefore, this bail 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.10,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction
of the learned trial court.
11. Copy of this order be sent to the concerned Jail Superintendent for
being conveyed to the accused/applicant.
12. A copy of this order be sent to the Commissioner of Police with the
directions to carry out detailed enquiry and to submit report within two
weeks from today as regards the above mentioned tampering of dates.
Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
GIRISH 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4
afec45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626c
acca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID –
KATHPALIA
7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5
d15570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c4879
65ff801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2026.03.09 18:58:49 -07’00’
GIRISH KATHPALIA
(JUDGE)
MARCH 09, 2026/ry
BAIL APPLN. 3959/2025 Page 5 of 5 pages
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:NEETU N NAIR
Signing Date:09.03.2026
18:05:51