High CourtsSingle Bench

Mohd Akhtar vs State Nct Of Delhi

Delhi High Court · Decided on 7 April 2026 · Citation: (2026) 04 DEL CK 0132

HON’BLE JUDGES
Girish Kathpalia, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Section 21, 29
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 1346 Of 2026 & Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 10580 Of 2026
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 344 words

Girish Kathpalia, J

1.

The accused/applicant seeks interim bail for a period of three months in case FIR No. 458/2025 of PS Gandhi Nagar for offence under Section 21/29 of NDPS Act.

2.

I  have  heard learned  counsel for  accused/applicant  and  learned  APP for State assisted by IO/ASI Sultan Singh.

3.

Broadly speaking,  the  accused/applicant  was  arrested  on  22.12.2025 and 505.47 grams smack was recovered from him. The accused/applicant now seeks interim bail on medical grounds, mainly contending that he is suffering with tuberculosis and psoriasis as well as haemorrhoids.

4.

Learned counsel for accused/applicant contends that the accused/applicant is suffering with the above mentioned ailments and his health condition has not improved despite medical treatment provided by the jail doctors.

5.

The interim bail application is strongly opposed by learned prosecutor, disclosing that the accused/applicant is involved in three more cases under NDPS Act and has been convicted in two similar cases. Further, it is contended that complete medical treatment is being provided to the accused/applicant  by  the  jail doctors.  In  this regard, learned  APP  for  State has taken me through order dated 17.03.2026 of the learned trial court in which after detailed discussion, it was held that health of the accused/applicant is being well taken care of. Further, the learned trial court has already directed the Jail Superintendent to personally monitor health condition of the accused/applicant.

6.

In the above backdrop, learned counsel for accused/applicant has been offered to suggest the doctor from whom the accused/applicant wants to take medical treatment, but learned counsel seeks time to obtain instructions.

7.

Considering the above circumstances, I do not find it a fit case to grant interim bail. Therefore, this bail application is dismissed. However, the Jail Superintendent is directed to ensure that the accused/applicant is produced  before  the  doctor/hospital  of  his  choice  for  his  medical  treatment in custody and for that purpose, the accused/applicant may convey his choice of doctor/hospital to the Jail Superintendent. Pending application also stands disposed of.

8.

For compliance, copy of this order be sent to the Jail Superintendent.