$~111 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 02.04.2026 + BAIL APPLN. 1207/2026 & CRL.M.(BAIL) 629/2026 HIMANSHU GUPTA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Kirti Uppal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rakesh Chahar, Mr. Ajay Paul, Mr. Aman Bhalla, Ms. Asmita Shukla and Mr. Keshav Das Monga, Advocates.

versus THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Manoj Pant, APP for the State.

CORAM:

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA

JUDGMENT

DR. SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J. (Oral

1. By way of the present application, the applicant seeks grant of regular bail in case arising out of FIR bearing no. 35/2026, registered at Police Station Janakpuri, Delhi for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 105 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereafter „BNS‟). Along with the present application for regular bail, the applicant has also filed an application for grant of interim bail to take care of his minor daughter.

2. Briefly stated, the facts of the present case are that the FIR in question was registered on receipt of a PCR call on 06.02.2026, informing that a motorcycle rider had fallen into a deep pit and was in need of immediate assistance. Upon receipt of the said information, police officials reached the spot, i.e. B-3B, near Andhra School, Janakpuri, New Delhi, where they found a young boy along with his motorcycle lying inside a pit measuring about 20 feet in length, 13 feet in width and about 14 feet in depth, which had been dug in the middle of the road. During the course of investigation, it was revealed that the said pit had been dug by the Delhi Jal Board [hereafter „DJB‟]. With the assistance of officials from the Fire Brigade, the injured boy was taken out of the pit and shifted to Deen Dayal Upadhyay Hospital; however, he was unfortunately declared brought dead. Thereafter, the Crime Team and the FSL Team were called at the spot, and investigation in the present case is being carried out.

3. The learned senior counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the anticipatory bail application of the applicant as well as co- accused Kavish Gupta had earlier been dismissed by this Court vide common order dated 25.02.2026, passed in BAIL APPLN. 765/2026 and 766/2026. It is submitted that thereafter co-accused Kavish Gupta preferred a Special Leave Petition before the Hon‟ble Supreme Court, being SLP (Crl.) No. 3836/2026, wherein he was granted interim protection from arrest vide order dated 27.02.2026. It is stated that before the SLP preferred by the present applicant Himanshu Gupta could be listed before the Hon‟ble Supreme Court, he was arrested in the present case on 10.03.2026, and his application for regular bail was thereafter rejected by the learned Sessions Court on

23.03.2026.

4. The learned senior counsel further submits that the applicant has been in judicial custody for more than 20 days. It is argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated on account of misleading submissions made by the police and officials of the Delhi Jal Board (DJB). It is contended that the police concealed the material fact that KKSIL–O Liner JV was the actual contractor executing the project and that the applicant was merely a suspended director who had no control over the affairs of the company, as the management of the company had vested with the Resolution Professional pursuant to the NCLT proceedings. It is argued that the police also misrepresented the applicant as the main contractor and opposed the anticipatory bail application on incorrect grounds, which allegedly misled this Court. It is further submitted that the officials of DJB had also made incorrect statements regarding their lack of knowledge of the NCLT proceedings, despite the existence of public notices in that regard, thereby prejudicing the case of the applicant. The learned senior counsel also argues that the bail had earlier been opposed on the ground that certain documents were required to be recovered from the applicant; however, the re