Final Order 2

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: -1-
25 BAIL MATTERS 1540/2026
STATE VS. SOHID
FIR NO. 03/2026
PS (AZADPUR METRO STATION)
02.07.2026
This is an application under Section 483 BNSS filed on
behalf of the applicant, namely, Sohid, therein seeking
regular bail.
Present : Ms. Geeta Bansiwal, Ld. Addl. P.P. for the State.
Mr. S.K. Tiwari, Ld. Counsel for the applicant/
accused.
Mr. Gauravjeet Narwan, Ld. Counsel for the
complainant through V.C.
IO/SI Gulab is present.
1. The applicant/accused, namely, Sohid has filed this
application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita (herein after “BNSS”) therein seeking grant of regular
bail. As per the supporting affidavit, this is the 2nd such bail
application. The first bail application of the applicant/accused was
dismissed by the Ld. Sessions Court, vide Order dated 19.05.2026.
2. The applicant/accused has been stated to have been
arrested on 18.03.2026 in connection with the case FIR bearing
no. 0003, dated 12.03.2026, lodged at PS Metro Police Station
Azadpur, for offences punishable under Sections
305(a)/3(5)/331(4)/329(4)/317(2) of the BNS and Sections
74(i)/78 of the Delhi Metro Railway Act, 2002.
3. The case of prosecution as follows. The aforesaid FIR
was registered upon the complaint dated 12.03.2026 of an
employee, namely, Jasbir Singh of Delhi Metro, wherein he stated
that on 12.03.2026, at about 04:20 AM, an information regarding
theft of 1000 metre signaling cable of WRS and
-- 1 of 5 --
-2-
CCTV, was received. The theft of the said cable affected the
operation of metro and also caused danger to the life of the
passengers. The police officials upon receiving the information
regarding the aforesaid theft from Majlis Park metro station
through telephone reached on the spot where DMRC staff
informed that it had come to their knowledge that 4-5 persons
were seen going with cable towards G-Block. The said police
officials went towards G-Block where they saw 4-5 persons while
burning the cable at an isolated place. Four of those persons ran
away and one person namely Sheikh Safik was however
apprehended. A cable of about 200 metre was recovered from him.
Thereafter, the present FIR was registered upon the filing of a
written complaint by the official of the DMRC.
4. Ld. Counsel for applicant/accused submitted that the
applicant/accused has been falsely implicated in the present case
after planting a false recovery upon him. It was also submitted that
the applicant/accused has been implicated in the present case on
the basis of a disclosure statement of co-accused. It was submitted
that after conclusion of investigation chargesheet has also been
filed. Ld. Counsel submitted that the co-accused, namely, Sheikh
Safik has been granted regular bail vide 20.06.2026. It was
submitted that the applicant/accused, a young man having clean
antecedents is the sole bread earner in the family. Lastly, it has
been submitted that the applicant/accused, if released on bail, shall
comply with all the conditions of the bail as would be imposed by
this Court.
5.
Per contra, Ld. Addl. P.P. for the State has opposed this
bail application on the ground that the act of applicant/accused
stealing the signaling cable from the metro-line
-- 2 of 5 --
-3-
was a dangerous act which could have result in loss of life of
passengers. It was also submitted that the offense punishable
under Section 74(i)/78 of the DMRC Act are punishable upto life
imprisonment. Lastly, it was submitted that in view of heinous
nature of offense, there is an apprehension of the
applicant/accused, if released on bail, absconding and/or
influencing the prosecution witnesses.
6. Ld. Counsel for the DMRC has supported the aforesaid
submissions made by the Ld. Addl. P.P. for the State for the
purpose of contesting the present application.
7. I have heard rival submissions from both the sides and
have also perused the judicial record.
8. It is noted that as per case of the prosecution, the co-
accused, namely, Sheikh Safik was arrested shortly after the
incident and a cable of 200 metre was also recovered from him.
The said co-accused has been granted bail by the Sessions Court
vide Order dated 20.06.2026 with the following reasons:
5. Undoubtedly offense alleged is a serious one as the
same affects public at large but in the present case,
various loop holes have been noted which create
serious doubt about the involvement of the applicant.
In this regard, various queries were made to IO and
metro officials but no sufficient reasons were given
by them. There is no proper explanation as to how the
other accused persons had run away from the spot
carrying approximately 200 meter of wire of each by
weighing approximately 32 kg (as per the
submissions of the metro officials). The
applicant/accused is living in the vicinity from where
he was allegedly arrested. There is no explanation as
to why he would not carry the alleged recovered wire
to his home instead of keeping it in the open &
putting the same on fire. The alleged area is
accessible to general public & the alleged recovery of
wire was openly on the land visible to
-- 3 of 5 --
-4-
all. In such scenareo, the recovery at instance of
accused is doubtful. The wire is allegedly recovered
from an open place just few meters away from the
metro compound. It is also doubtful that after having
stolen the alleged wire, the accused would still
remain there for few hours so making it convenient
for the metro officials to arrest him. Admittedly there
is no CCTV footage regarding the alleged theft of
wire. Whole of the case rests on the disclosure
statement of the applicant.
9. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and
considering (a) the only basis of implicating the applicant/accused
herein is the disclosure statement of the co-accused, Sheikh Safik;
(b) the said disclosure statement of co-accused is not even an
evidence as per law; (c) the said co-accused has been granted
regular bail; (d) the lesser, or even at the most similar role of the
applicant/accused as that of co-accused, Sheikh Safik; and (e) the
principle of parity, this Court is of the view that the
applicant/accused should be released on bail.
10. The applicant/accused, namely, Sohid, is admitted to
bail in connection with the case FIR bearing no. 0003, dated
12.03.2026, lodged at PS Metro Police Station Azadpur, for
offences punishable under Sections 305(a)/3(5)/331(4)/329(4)/
317(2) of the BNS and Sections 74(i)/78 of the Delhi Metro
Railway Act, 2002 on his furnishing a personal bond to the tune of
Rs. 20,000/- with one surety of the like amount, subject to the
following conditions:
(a) Applicant/accused shall appear before the Court on each and
every date of hearing.
(b) That applicant/accused shall not try to contact or influence,
directly or indirectly, any of the witnesses;
(c) That the accused / applicant shall intimate the Court in case
of change of his address.
11. Nothing stated herein above shall tantamount to be the
-- 4 of 5 --
-5-
expression on the merits of the present case.
12. A copy of this Order be given
dasti. A copy of this
Order be also sent to the applicant/accused through jail authorities.
(Sachin Mittal)
ASJ-05/North-West District
Rohini Courts/Delhi/02.07.2026
-- 5 of 5 --