Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Delhi · body

2026 DAILYLAW 14664 (DEL)

VISHNU DUTT SHARMA v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

BAIL APPLN./2888/2026 · 2026-08-05

Saurabh Banerjee

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

$~11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010325792026 + BAIL APPLN. 2888/2026 VISHNU DUTT SHARMA .....Applicant Through: Mr. Mohit Rana, Mr. Sanjoli, Mr. Shivam Gaur, Mr. Aditya Choudhary, Mr. Piyush Sharma, Ms. Ambika Gupta, Mr. Ritik Rana and Mr. Himanshu Rohilla, Advs. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya, APP for the State with Mr. Aditya Vikram Singh, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE O R D E R % 05.08.2026 1. By virtue of the present 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.296/2025 dated 08.10.2025 registered at PS.: Crime Branch, Delhi under Sections 22/23/ 25/8(c)/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant’s wife, aged about 59 years, has been diagnosed with Fibroid Uterus and is presently suffering from multiple uterine fibroids, including fibroids measuring approximately 66×71mm and 32×40mm. He further submits that she has been advised to undergo a hysterectomy surgery at the earliest, however, owing to the applicant’s continued incarceration and the inability of the family to complete the necessary medical, financial and 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 07/08/2026 at 11:22:38 logistical arrangements, the said surgery has already been deferred on three different occasions. He also submits that since her condition is deteriorating day by day, she has also been advised to undergo biopsy to rule out malignancy, therefore since the applicant is the sole earning member of the family as also the primary caregiver, his presence with her pre and post-surgery is extremely necessary. 3. Per contra, learned APP opposing the present application submits that the applicant is not the primary caregiver and the sole person capable of ensuring the aforesaid treatment, in fact, the applicant has two children, who are residing in USA and Hyderabad, and are fully capable of looking after their mother as also assist her in the said treatment. 4. Heard and perused. 5. As borne out, though the applicant’s wife has been diagnosed with Fibroid Uterus and is advised to undergo a hysterectomy surgery, a fact which has been duly verified by the learned APP, however, the applicant has failed to demonstrate his role as the sole caregiver, more so, whence he has two major sons to cater to the aforesaid needs. 6. Strangely, though the two children are presently residing in USA and Hyderabad respectively, however, there is no plausible reason for them to not travel and attend to their ailing mother. Thus, there is no reason for this Court to allow the present application. 7. Accordingly, the present application is dismissed. SAURABH BANERJEE, J. AUGUST 05, 2026/So/DA 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 07/08/2026 at 11:22:38