$~78 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A. 860/2024 SETHI @ VIJAY .....Appellant Through: Mr. Dinesh Malik and Mr. Puneet Jain, Advocates (DHCLSC)

versus STATE NCT OF DELHI THROUGH SHO PS UTTAM NAGAR .....Respondent Through: Mr. Pradeep Gahalot, APP for the State with ASI Amita and SI Rohit.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE CHANDRASEKHARAN SUDHA

O R D E R

% 30.01.2026 CRL.M.A. 3136/2026

1. This application under Section 440 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (the Cr.P.C.) read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking release of the accused on furnishing a personal bond on the ground that he has been unable to even vide furnish a bond of ₹5,000/- as directed order dated 08.08.2025.

2. The learned counsel for the appellant/ accused submits that the financial condition of the appellant/accused is such that he was vide unable to comply with the order dated 28.05.2025. This Court, order dated 08.08.2025, reduced the surety amount to an amount of ₹5,000/-. However, it is submitted that despite such reduction, the appellant/accused has been unable to arrange for the surety due to his financial exigencies.

3. This Court has been taken through the FIS as well as the Section 164 statement of the victim. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the appellant/ accused has no criminal antecedents, the prayer seeking release of the appellant/ accused on furnishing a personal bond is allowed, subject to the following conditions:-

(i)The appellant shall not commit any offence(s) while on bail and shall appear before this Court as and when directed.

(ii)The appellant shall provide his mobile number and residential address to the Station House Officer (SHO) concerned, on which he shall remain available. In case of change of mobile number or residential address, the appellant shall promptly inform the SHO concerned as well as this Court.

4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the DSLSA that father of the victim has refused to receive the compensation that has been ordered by the trial court and, therefore, the amount could not be disbursed. He, therefore, seeks discharge from the present case.

5. The learned counsel for the DSLSA stands discharged.

6. With the above directions, the application is disposed of.

7. A copy of this order be communicated electronically to the Jail Superintendent concerned for information and compliance.

CRL.A. 860/2024

8. List on 04.08.2026.

CHANDRASEKHARAN SUDHA, J JANUARY 30, 2026 kd