High CourtsSingle Bench

Sanjay Lakra vs State (Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi)

Delhi High Court · Decided on 28 April 2026 · Citation: (2026) 04 DEL CK 0859

HON’BLE JUDGES
Girish Kathpalia, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 — Section 3, 4
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 1639 Of 2026 & Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 13250 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

8 paragraphs · 363 words

Girish Kathpalia, J

1.

The accused/applicant seeks interim bail in FIR No.78/2018 of PS Special Cell for offence under Section 3 & 4 MCOC Act. The interim bail is sought by the accused/applicant on the ground of illness of his wife.

2.

Learned counsel for accused/applicant submits that wife of the accused/applicant is suffering with severe depression to the extent that she has to be hospitalized and for that purpose, round the clock presence of the accused/applicant with her is required. In this regard, learned counsel for accused/applicant places reliance on prescription of Dr. Anurag Jhanjee from Department of Psychiatry of Maulana Azad Medical College.

3.

Learned APP for State assisted by IO/ACP Vivek Tyagi strongly opposes the bail application, taking me through records including order dated 20.03.2026 of the learned trial court whereby on the basis of report submitted by Medical Board constituted at IHBAS to examine wife of the accused/applicant, interim bail application was dismissed. It is submitted that the accused/applicant is involved in 16 more cases of similar serious nature and grant of interim bail to the accused/applicant would not be safe.

4.

So far as the prescription relied upon by the learned counsel for accused/applicant is concerned, the same (page 61 of paperbook) does not even bear name of the patient and even otherwise, the admission recommended in that prescription is specifically for diagnostic clarification. But much more reliable in this regard is the report of the Medical Board constituted at IHBAS, which after examining the wife of the accused/applicant submitted report in sealed covered before the trial court. The learned trial court in order dated 20.03.2026 recorded observations of the said report of the Medical Board that the patient is a case of moderate depression with no high risk behaviours; that she requires regular follow up in psychiatry department of her choice; and that she does not require hospitalization.

5.

Going by the aforesaid, I do not find it a fit case to grant interim bail to the accused/applicant. The application is dismissed.

6.

Accompanying application also stands disposed of.

7.

Copy of this order be sent to the concerned Jail Superintendent for being informed to the accused/applicant.