Sunny vs The State Of Nct Of Delhi on 24 April, 2026

    0
    37
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Supreme Court – Daily Orders

    Sunny vs The State Of Nct Of Delhi on 24 April, 2026

    Author: Aravind Kumar

    Bench: Aravind Kumar

                                      IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                                     CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
    
                                      CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.        OF 2026
                                         (@SLP(CRL.) NO.2657 OF 2026)
    
                             SUNNY                                     …APPELLANT(S)
    
    
                                                       VERSUS
    
    
                             STATE OF NCT OF DELHI                   …RESPONDENT(S)
    
    
    
                                                      ORDER
    

    1. Heard.

    2. Leave granted.

    SPONSORED

    3. Based on an intel input received by the jurisdictional

    police, a trap came to be laid near Bhalswa Dairy Bus Stand and

    appellant and his wife who were proceeding on a Scooty, which

    Signature Not Verified
    belonged to the wife of the appellant, was intercepted and on
    Digitally signed by
    RASHI GUPTA
    Date: 2026.04.27
    18:14:58 IST
    Reason:

    1 SLP(CRL.) NO.2657 OF 2026
    personal search no contraband was found. However, in the boot

    of Scooty they found 280 grams of heroin and as such FIR

    No.737/2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 21, 25

    and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act,

    1985 (NDPS Act) came to be registered against both the

    accused. Though the appellant moved an application under

    Section 91 CrPC seeking preservation of CDRs and mobile

    locations contending that the raiding party had not intercepted

    the vehicle, as against the claim of prosecution, said application

    came to be dismissed by the trial court by order dated

    12.09.2024.

    4. It is thereafter during the course of investigation the

    statement of the appellant was recorded under Section 67 NDPS

    Act and thereafter has implicated the co-accused sahidul alias

    Babu and on search of the house of said person, recovery of 294

    grams of heroin was made. However, it is a fact that the said

    Sahidul has been released on bail and even the wife of the

    appellant has also been enlarged on bail.

    2 SLP(CRL.) NO.2657 OF 2026

    5. Though the learned counsel appearing for the respondent-

    State would vehemently oppose the grant of bail by contending

    that appellant if released on bail is likely to indulge in similar

    act, we are not inclined to accept the same. Having regard to the

    fact that the appellant’s wife, at the time of filing of the

    application for grant of bail before the trial court, was on

    advanced pregnancy stage (eight months) and also having

    regard to the fact that minor children are there to be taken care

    of, we are of the considered view that the appellant would also

    be entitled for the relief of bail.

    6. Accordingly, appeal is allowed. Impugned order is set

    aside. Appellant is ordered to be released on bail on such terms

    and conditions as the jurisdictional court may deem fit to

    impose including the condition of directing the appellant to

    cooperate with further investigation, if any, and also on the

    condition that appellant would appear before the jurisdictional

    trial court on all dates of hearing except when exempted for any

    3 SLP(CRL.) NO.2657 OF 2026
    specific reason.

    7. It is made clear that in the event of any fresh criminal

    case of similar offence, is registered against the appellant, the

    respondent would be at liberty to file an application for

    cancellation of the bail. In the event of such application being

    filed, the trial court shall consider the same on its own merits

    and in accordance with law.

    8. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

    ………………………………………J.
    (ARAVIND KUMAR)

    ………………………………………J.
    (PRASANNA B. VARALE)

    New Delhi;

    April 24, 2026.

    
    
    
    
    4                                       SLP(CRL.) NO.2657 OF 2026
    ITEM NO.10        COURT NO.15          SECTION II-D
    
            S U P R E M E C O U R T O F      I N D I A
                   RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
    
    

    Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)
    No(s). 2657/2026

    [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order
    dated 29-08-2025 in BA No. 2490/2025 passed by
    the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi]

    SUNNY Petitioner(s)

    VERSUS

    STATE OF NCT OF DELHI Respondent(s)

    IA No. 35053/2026 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.

    Date : 24-04-2026 This matter was called on for
    hearing today.

    CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR
    HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASANNA B. VARALE

    For Petitioner(s) :Ms. Vagisha Kochar, AOR
    Mr. Ajay Marwah, Adv.

    Mr. Cm Sangwan, Adv.

    Mr. Pawan Aneja, Adv.

    For Respondent(s) :Mr. Satya Darshi Sanjay, A.S.G.
    Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR
    Mr. Divyam Aggarwal, Adv.

    Ms. Mili Joy Baxi, Adv.

    Ms. Rajeshwari Shankar, Adv.

    Ms. Nikita Sethi, Adv.

    5 SLP(CRL.) NO.2657 OF 2026
    UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the
    following
    O R D E R

    1. Leave granted.

    2. Appeal is allowed in terms of the
    Signed Order placed on the file.

    3. Pending application(s), if any, shall
    stand disposed of.

    (RASHI GUPTA)                     (AVGV RAMU)
    COURT MASTER (SH)             COURT MASTER (NSH)
    
    
    
    
    6                            SLP(CRL.) NO.2657 OF 2026
    



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here