Sudesh Verma v. State NCT of Delhi

O R D E R %

19.08.2026

¶1This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

¶2The present appeal has been preferred under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, assailing the common order dated 24.07.2026 passed by the learned ASJ-02, Dwarka Courts, South-West District, New Delhi, in Bail Matter No. 906/2026, whereby the bail applications preferred on behalf of the Appellant, came to be dismissed. The relevant portion of the impugned order is reproduced hereinbelow: "During the course of arguments, ld. counsel for applicants has argued that applicants also belongs to SC/ST community, however, there is nothing on record to substantiate the same and the IO today has submitted that caste certificate of the applicants have been verified from The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. Haryana and applicants belongs to OBC caste.

¶11Thus, in view of aforesaid discussions, the present application is not maintainable as per law and is liable to be dismissed.

¶12Even otherwise on merits, IO in his reply dated

18.05.2026, has categorically stated that the conduct of the applicants demonstrate non-cooperation with the investigation and despite repeated notices they have not joined the investigation. The conduct of the applicants herein does not warrant interference by this Court and exercise of extra ordinary jurisdiction for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶13In view of the aforesaid discussion, no ground to grant bail to applicants is made out at this stage. Accordingly, bail application moved on behalf of applicants/accused persons Bhanu Rani and Sudesh Verma stands dismissed."

¶3That the appellant has filed the accompanying application seeking grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No. 06/2026, registered at P.S. Palam Village, Delhi, dated 05.01.2026, under Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(u) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

¶4Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that Appellant is the sister of the daughter-in-law of the complainant. It is submitted that as many as 13 cases are pending between the sister of the appellant and the complainant before various Courts in Delhi.

¶5It is submitted that despite the observations of the DCP that no case was made out and the closure report having been filed by the police officials, the learned Trial Court accepted the protest petition and dismissed the Appellant's application for anticipatory bail. It is further submitted that the Appellant is also in a family way having a pregnancy of 6 months.

¶6Learned APP for the State, appearing on advance notice, submits that The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. the matter arises out of a matrimonial dispute between the complainant and the Appellant's sister. It is submitted that the parties are engaged in multiple rounds of litigation against each other. Learned APP further submits that although a closure report had been filed by the police officials, the same has not been accepted by the learned Trial Court.

¶7I have heard the parties and perused the record.

¶8The charge-sheet against the remaining accused persons already stands filed. It is also noted that non-bailable warrants have been issued against the present appellant by the learned Trial Court. However, considering that the appellant is a pregnant woman and that more than 13 cases are stated to be pending between the parties before various Courts in Delhi, this Court is of the view that the aforesaid circumstances require consideration while examining the prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶9Accordingly, in the event of arrest, the appellant shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned SHO/Investigating Officer, subject to the following conditions: i. The Appellant shall remain available on mobile numbers shared by her with the Police. ii. The Appellant shall not directly or indirectly make an attempt to influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence in any manner. iii. In case of change of residential address/contact details, the Appellant shall promptly inform the concerned I.O/SHO. iv. The Appellant shall join and cooperate with the investigation as and when directed by the Investigating Officer/ concerned SHO. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

¶10The appeals, along with the pending applications, stand disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶11A copy of this order be sent to the learned Trial Court for information and necessary compliance.

¶12The order be uploaded on the website forthwith MADHU JAIN, J AUGUST 19, 2026/sd The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010386032026 + CRL.A. 806/2026 CRL.M.A. 25501/2026 CRL.M.(BAIL) 1565/2026 SUDESH VERMA .....Appellant Through: Mr. K.P. Mavi, Adv. versus STATE NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Ajay Vikram Singh, APP with ACP Anil Kumar and Insp. Rajesh Kumar. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MADHU JAIN