SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Del) 46656

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SHARAD PAL & ORS. VS. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.
CRL.M.C. 9340/2025



##PAGE1##

$~39

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CRL.M.C. 9340/2025, CRL.M.A. 38989/2025 & CRL.M.A.

38990/2025

STATE OF NCT OF DELHI .....Petitioner

Through: Mr. Akhand Pratap Singh, SPP for

State with Ms. Samridhi Dobhal, Mr. Hritwik

Maurya, Mr. Mayank Kaushik and Ms. Lisa

Pegwal, Advs.

versus

TUSHAR GOYAL .....Respondent

Through:

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL

O R D E R

% 24.12.2025

CRL.M.A. 38990/2025 (Exemption)

1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. The application stands disposed of.

CRL.M.C. 9340/2025 & CRL.M.A. 38989/2025

3. Through the present petition, the petitioner seeks the following

reliefs:-

“a) Set aside the impugned order dated 23.12.2025 passed by the Ld.

Special Judge, (NDPS)-02, Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in

CNR No. DLCT010110002025, SC No.495/2025 titled as “State Vs.

Tushar Goyal & Ors.” arising out of the FIR No. 455/2024, dated

02.10.2024, u/s 20/21/22/25/27(A)/29 NDPS Act, & section 238(B)/209

BNS, PS Special Cell, New Delhi;

b) Cancel the interim bail granted to Tushar Goyal (Respondent herein)

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/01/2026 at 20:39:09

##PAGE2##

and direct him to surrender before the concerned jail authorities; and

c) Pass such Order (s) as this Hon'ble Court deem fit in the interest of

justice.”

4. It has been informed by the learned SPP that the application before

the learned ASJ was filed by the respondent on 16.12.2025 for grant of

interim bail for the surgery of his mother and notice was issued for

18.12.2025. However, nobody could appear on behalf of the petitioner as no

notice was received by him. Thereafter, fresh notice was issued for

22.12.2025 but again, no notice was served upon the petitioner due to which

the petitioner was unaware about any such application being listed.

5. It is further submitted that on 22.12.2025, learned SPP appeared

before the learned ASJ for arguments in bail applications of the co-accused

persons related to the same FIR, on which date learned SPP submits that he

was taken by surprise as he was completely unaware that some application

for interim bail has been filed by the respondent and is listed, without any

notice served upon him. On the said date, the respondent was granted

interim bail for a period of one day despite the fact that the learned SPP had

sought time to respond to that application and to verify the medical

documents. The learned SPP had requested for some time from the learned

ASJ to verify the factum of the surgery of respondent’s mother, on the basis

of which the interim bail was sought. The Court thereafter adjourned the

matter for 23.12.2025.

6. It is submitted that on 23.12.2025, the factum of the verification could

not be verified as the hospital had informed the investigation agency that it

will take 2-4 days to submit their report. On this basis, the learned ASJ had

granted interim bail to the respondent till 03.01.2026, in the absence of any

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/01/2026 at 20:39:09

##PAGE3##

verification report.

7. It is also submitted by learned SPP that the day when the impugned

order was passed, there was nothing on record to suggest that the petitioner’s

mother has been admitted in the hospital and no schedule was on learned

ASJ’s record to reflect that she has to undergo a surgery. It is submitted that

the learned ASJ was also not aware of the specific nature of the ailment and

surgery for which interim bail was being sought as the same do not find any

mention in the impugned order, instead the impugned order records ‘some

surgery’ and ‘some ailments’.

8. It is further submitted that on the previous occasions as well, the

respondent had sought for interim bail on one or the other grounds,

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top