Basant@Basanta vs the State(Gnctd)

Basant@Basanta vs The State(Gnctd)

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Orders Decided Mar 30, 2026

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1271113

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1271113
Court: Delhi Orders High Court
Judge: Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Prateek Jalan
Decided On: Mar 30, 2026
Case Number: BAIL APPLN./3550/2025
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Basant@Basanta

Advocate Mr. Narender Mukhi

Respondent

The State(Gnctd)

Advocate Mr. Yudhvir Singh Chauhan, Mr. Rohit Priya Ranjan

Excerpt

* in the high court of delhi at new delhi+ bail appln. 3550/2025 basant@basanta .....petitioner through: mr. narender mukhi, advocate.versusthe state (gnctd) .....respondent through: mr. yudhvir singh chauhan, app. mr. rohit priya ranjan, advocate (dhclsc) for complainant. insp. mantosh singh, ps shalimar bagh & insp. bhanu pratap.coram:hon’ble mr. justice prateek jalanorder% 30.03.20261. by way of this application under section 483 of the bharatiyanagarik suraksha sanhita, 2023, the applicant seeks regular bail in connection with fir no. 8/2022 dated 02.01.2022, registered at police station shalimar bagh, district north-west, new delhi, under section 302 of the indian penal code, 1860.2. mr. yudhvir singh chauhan, learned additional public prosecutor, has handed up an updated status report, which is taken on record.3. after some hearing, mr. narender mukhi, learned counsel for the applicant, seeks permission to withdraw this bail application, but seeks directions for expeditious trial.4. i am informed that, of the remaining witnesses, only two are bail appln. 3550/2025 page 1 of 2 material witnesses, and the others are official witnesses.5. having regard to the period of incarceration of the applicant, theapplicant is at liberty to move the learned sessions court for expedition of the trial. the sessions court is requested to consider the same in accordance with its own board and the age of matters pending before it.6. the bail application is dismissed as withdrawn.7. it is made clear that this court has not made any comment on themerits of the case or on any proposed application before the learned sessions court, which may be considered by the learned sessions court in accordance with law. prateek jalan, j march 30, 2026 ‘pv/ka’/ bail appln. 3550/2025 page 2 of 2

Full Judgment

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ BAIL APPLN. 3550/2025 BASANT@BASANTA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Narender Mukhi, Advocate.
versus
THE STATE (GNCTD) .....Respondent Through: Mr. Yudhvir Singh Chauhan, APP. Mr. Rohit Priya Ranjan, Advocate (DHCLSC) for Complainant. Insp. Mantosh Singh, PS Shalimar Bagh & Insp. Bhanu Pratap.
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN

ORDER

% 30.03.2026

1. By way of this application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya

Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the applicant seeks regular bail in connection with FIR No. 8/2022 dated 02.01.2022, registered at Police Station Shalimar Bagh, District North-West, New Delhi, under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2. Mr. Yudhvir Singh Chauhan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, has handed up an updated status report, which is taken on record.

3. After some hearing, Mr. Narender Mukhi, learned counsel for the applicant, seeks permission to withdraw this bail application, but seeks directions for expeditious trial.

4. I am informed that, of the remaining witnesses, only two are BAIL APPLN. 3550/2025 Page 1 of 2 material witnesses, and the others are official witnesses.

5. Having regard to the period of incarceration of the applicant, the

applicant is at liberty to move the learned Sessions Court for expedition of the trial. The Sessions Court is requested to consider the same in accordance with its own Board and the age of matters pending before it.

6. The bail application is dismissed as withdrawn.

7. It is made clear that this Court has not made any comment on the

merits of the case or on any proposed application before the learned Sessions Court, which may be considered by the learned Sessions Court in accordance with law. PRATEEK JALAN, J MARCH 30, 2026 ‘pv/KA’/ BAIL APPLN. 3550/2025 Page 2 of 2

Same Court & Year Delhi Orders · 2026 Same Parties Basant@Basanta vs The State(Gnctd) Same Subject Land Acquisition Same Judge Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Prateek Jalan