Ram Hari Rai vs The State Of Nct Of Delhi

$~1
*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 17.07.2026
+ BAIL APPLN. 1648/2026
RAM HARI RAI .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Aditya Aggarwal, Mr. Naveen
Panwar, Ms. Manvi Gupta, Ms.
Japneet and Mohd. Yasir, Advocates.

versus

THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent

Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP for State
with IO/SI Yashpal.






CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
(ORAL)
J U D G M E N T

1. The accused/applicant seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 74/2026
of Police Station Amar Colony for offence under Section 20 of NDPS Act.

2. Broadly speaking, the allegation against the accused/applicant is that
he provided accommodation to the main accused Man Bahadur, from whom
commercial quantity of charas was recovered. On last date of hearing, after
hearing both sides, the accused/applicant was granted interim protection
from arrest till this date.

BAIL APPLN.1648/2026 Page 1 of 4 pages
GIRISH
KATHPALIA
Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec45569af3962c6fb48
35d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638,
postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570996b40f80cbd2
eee60402c487965ff801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2026.07.17 17:24:51 +05'30'
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RAHUL YADAV
Signing Date:17.07.2026
17:28:56

3. But it is extremely unfortunate that despite the accused/applicant
having been granted interim protection till this date, the prosecution did not
file status report. It is submitted by learned APP that they had filed the status
report but the same is not on record as it is lying under objections. It was for
the prosecution side to ensure that the objections were removed in time.
More deplorable is the conduct of the Investigating Officer that he started
briefing the learned prosecutor only after this matter was called and the
court kept waiting for the briefing to complete in the courtroom. This is not
how the issue of liberty must be addressed by the State agencies. The police
cannot simply arrest and dump people in jail, without any serious
participation, where they want to oppose the grant of liberty. It has been
repeatedly directed that as it used to happen few years earlier, the
investigators must brief the prosecutors prior to commencement of court.

4. Be that as it may, I have heard learned APP for State assisted by
Investigating Officer/SI Yashpal.

5. Admittedly, apart from the confessional statement of accused Man
Bahadur, recorded when he was in police custody, there is no other evidence
collected against the present accused/applicant.

6. Learned APP, on instructions of Investigating Officer, contends that
the accused/applicant did not join investigation despite having been granted

BAIL APPLN.1648/2026 Page 2 of 4 pages
GIRISH
KATHPALIA
Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec45569af3962c6fb48
35d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638,
postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570996b40f80cbd2
eee60402c487965ff801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2026.07.17 17:25:06 +05'30'
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RAHUL YADAV
Signing Date:17.07.2026
17:28:56

interim protection from arrest by last order. Learned counsel for
accused/applicant submits that the Investigating Officer never called the
accused/applicant to join investigation. On this aspect, the Investigating
Officer submits that despite efforts, he could not trace out the
accused/applicant, but he can produce neither any notice taken to be served
on the accused/applicant, nor any DD Entry recorded by him before
proceeding to the house of the accused/applicant nor any Case Diary of the
present case, reflecting any such effort done by him.

7. It is also submitted by learned APP that in an earlier case, the
accused/applicant was granted bail but became untraceable, so his surety
was called by the trial court and the surety expressed unawareness about the
address of the accused/applicant. On this aspect, the Investigating Officer
has not filed any document reflecting any effort done by him to verify the
address of the accused/applicant as disclosed in memo of parties to this bail
application. As mentioned above, even status report has not been filed.
Going a step deeper, it is also not denied that the Investigating Officer never
tried to contact the counsel for the accused/applicant or even the learned
prosecutor to report to them that the accused/applicant is not traceable.

8. At this stage during dictation of this order, learned APP requests that
learned counsel for accused/applicant be directed to provide to the
Investigating Officer, any address of the accused/applicant other than the
one mentioned in the memo of parties, if so available, along with mobile

BAIL APPLN.1648/2026 Page 3 of 4 pages
GIRISH
KATHPALIA
Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec45569af3962c6fb
4835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID -
7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570996b40f80cb
d2eee60402c487965ff801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2026.07.17 17:25:20 +05'30'
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RAHUL YADAV
Signing Date:17.07.2026
17:28:56

phone number of the accused/applicant. Learned counsel for
accused/applicant assures to take appropriate instructions from his client.

9. Considering the overall circumstances narrated above, I find no
reason to deprive the accused/applicant liberty. The application is allowed
and it is directed that in the event of his arrest, the accused/applicant shall be
released on bail, subject to his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of
Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the
IO/SHO concerned.

10. Copy of this order be sent to the Commissioner of Police through
Senior Standing Counsel directing issuance of appropriate instructions to the
investigating officers across Delhi, since similar directions issued earlier to
DCPs yielded no result.

Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4af
ec45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacc
a, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID -
7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d
15570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965f
f801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2026.07.17 17:25:33 +05'30'



GIRISH
KATHPALIA

GIRISH KATHPALIA
(JUDGE)
ry
JULY 17, 2026/

BAIL APPLN.1648/2026 Page 4 of 4 pages
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RAHUL YADAV
Signing Date:17.07.2026
17:28:56