$~83 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A. 1657/2025 RATANDEEP SINGH .....Appellant Through: Mr. Irfan Firdous, Ms. Nandini Bindoria, Mr. Faraz Mirza and Mr.

Kashif Athar, Advocates versus STATE NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Utkarsh, APP for State with W/SI Purvi Ahlawat CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE CHANDRASEKHARAN SUDHA

O R D E R

% 19.01.2026 CM APPLs. 1897-1898/2026 (Exemptions)

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

The applications stand disposed of.

CRL.M.(BAIL) 120/2026

1. The present application has been filed under Section 430 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, seeking extension of the interim suspension of sentence for a period of 30 days granted vide order dated 23.12.2025

2. The ground alleged is that the mother of the appellant needs to undergo a knee surgery and also that she has sustained fracture of her ankle and that there is no one to look after her except the appellant/accused.

3. The present application is opposed by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor who submits that there is absolutely no materials produced to show that the appellant’s mother has sustained a fracture. It is also submitted that when the matter came up on 23.12.2025, there was no submission to the effect that the mother of the appellant had sustained a fracture, though the injury is alleged to have been sustained on 15.12.2025. It is also submitted that there is no materials produced to show that the appellant’s mother requires knee replacement surgery. Therefore, it is submitted that extension may not be allowed especially when the appellant/accused has criminal antecedents. The attention of the Court is also drawn to Annexure (A-5) dated 13.01.2026, in which one Dr. Ankit Kumar Sharma, Orthopaedics has noted that the mother had complained of foot pain.

4. Heard both sides.

5. This Court vide order dated 23.12.2025 had granted 30 days interim suspension of sentence to the appellant/accused on the ground that the appellant’s mother has to undergo a knee replacement surgery. The extension now sought is on the ground that the mother has sustained a fracture on her ankle. However, as pointed out by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor there is no material(s) to show that the mother has sustained a fracture. Moreover, the appellant/accused has criminal antecedents. The report that has been handed over to me during the course of hearing shows that the appellant/accused has been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 392, 411 read with Section

34 IPC.

6. In the light of the criminal antecedents, the interim suspension of sentence cannot be extended for a further period of

30 days. The application is accordingly dismissed.

7. The appellant/accused shall surrender before the Jail Superintendent concerned on 23.01.2026 by 05:30 p.m.

CRL.A. 1657/2025

1. Let the latest nominal roll of the appellant be requisitioned from the Jail Superintendent concerned.

2. Let a digitized copy of the trial court record be also requisitioned and made available to the Court on the next date of hearing.

3. List on 05.05.2026.

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

CHANDRASEKHARAN SUDHA, J JANUARY 19, 2026 p’ma