$~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010941132025 + BAIL APPLN. 4574/2025 AKRAM @ AMAN .....Applicant Through: Mr. Ravi Singh Chhikara and Ms. Ashwani Kumar, Advs. Versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Satish Kumar, APP for State with Mr. Aditya Vikram Singh, Ms. Upasana Bakshi and Ms. Divya Bakshi, Advs. Mr. Avneesh Saran, Ms. Anita Saran and Mr. Mandeep Aggarwal, Advs. for complainant Insp. Vijay S. and SI- Naveen Kumar, PS: Mahendra Park CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE O R D E R % 17.08.2026 1. By virtue of the present bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the applicant seeks grant of regular bail in proceedings arising out of FIR No.558/2024 dated 31.10.2024 registered at PS.: Mahendra Park under Sections 65/115(2)/137/351 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act). 2. Written synopsis handed over by learned counsel for the victim/ affected party is taken on record. 3. Succinctly put, the present FIR was registered on the complaint/ 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 21/08/2026 at 11:27:13 statement made by the affected party wherein she stated that on 30.10.2024 an unknown person had chased her and took her near the garbage dump and sexually assault her. Thence the affected party was threatened by the applicant not to disclose about the incident to anyone. 4. During investigation, the CCTV camera installed near the spot revealed that one person was clearly visible holding the hand of the affected party and leading her towards the place of occurrence. Pursuant thereto, upon the Police successfully identifying the applicant, he was apprehended on the intervening night of 01-02.11.2024 from his relative’s house at Village Bagi, District Rampur, Uttar Pradesh (U.P.) and brought to PS.: Mahendra Park for investigation. Subsequently, a remand order was obtained on 02.11.2024 and he was formally arrested and taken into judicial custody thereafter. 5. In the proceedings before the learned Trial Court, charges have since been framed and the matter is currently at the stage of prosecution evidence. 6. In fact, the primary, if not the sole, ground raised by learned counsel for the applicant qua seeking regular bail is that the arrest, being in violation of the fundamental rights enshrined under the Constitution of India, is itself illegal, more so, since the requirement to seek transit remand was not sought as also the grounds of arrest were not informed to the applicant. 7. It is under these facts and circumstances that this Court has heard the learned counsels for the applicant and the affected party as also the learned APP and perused the materials on record. 8. A cumulative reading of the Section(s) 167, 56 and 57 of the Code 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 21/08/2026 at 11:27:13 of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC)/ Section(s) 187, 57 and 58 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Samhita, 2023 (BNSS) and Article 22(2) of the Constitution of India (CoI) reveals that they all were enacted with the objective to ensure that an accused is produced before the Magistrate within 24 hours so as to ensure protection of his life and liberty from abuse of power by the incumbent authority carrying out the investigation. 9. It is in this contextual backdrop that Section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/ Section 187 of the BNSS mandates a transit remand order to be obtained from the nearest Jurisdictional Magistrate, if the investigation cannot be completed within 24 hours as fixed by Section 57 of the CrPC/ Section 58 of the BNSS. As a necessary corollary, if an accused can be produced before the Magistrate having jurisdiction of the case without infringing the mandate of producing the said accused within 24 hours, there is no requirement of seeking a transit remand, as also held by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in Sandeep Kumar v. State (NCT of Delhi): 2019 SCC OnLine Del 11901. 10. In view of the aforesaid settled position of law, and as per the charge-sheet, since the applicant was apprehended on the intervening night of 01-02.11.2024 and was formally arrested on 02.11.2024, whereafter, he was produced before the Jurisdictional Magistrate and a remand order was obtained on 02.11.2024 itself, i.e., within 24 hours, there is no requirement of going into the issue of illegality of arrest. Interestingly, since the applicant herein was duly represented in the remand proceedings on 02.11.2024 itself, there is/ was no demonstrable prejudice caused to the applicant so as to render his arrest illegal, and that too, at this belated stage. 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 21/08/2026 at 11:27:13 11. In any event, the said issue regarding ambiguity qua the illegality of arrest, if any, can only be tested at the anvil of trial. 12. Therefore, at this stage, while considering grant of regular bail to the applicant, this Court cannot go into the discrepancies/ inconsistencies in testimonies/ statements, particularly, since it is trite that what is to be seen is whether a prima facie case is made out for grant of regular bail to the applicant or not. 13. Thus, in view of the aforesaid position as emerging, and the nature of offence, especially the incontrovertible fact that the affected party is aged about seven years who was forcefully taken near the garbage as per the CCTV footage, as also that the applicant has been successfully identified not only by the Police but also by the affected party in TIP proceedings as well, the applicant is not entitled for grant of regular bail. All the more whence taken cumulatively, they weigh against the applicant. 14. Hence, the present application is dismissed. 15. Needless to say, expression of view(s) on the merits, if any, are solely for the purposes of adjudication of the present application and shall have no bearing on the overall case/ trial involved. SAURABH BANERJEE, J AUGUST 17, 2026/Ab 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 21/08/2026 at 11:27:13