$~44
*	IN  THE  HIGH  COURT  OF  DELHI  AT  NEW  DELHI
%					                    Date of Decision: 29.09.2026
+ 	BAIL APPLN. 4158/2026, CRL.M.A. 30744/2026 & 30745/2026 
	VISHAL @ PAIWALA			                 .....Petitioner
				Through:	 Ms. Dolly Sharma, Advocate.

				versus

	STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI		       .....Respondent
				Through:	Ms. Manjeet Arya, APP for State.







     CORAM:          JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

                                                                        
J U D G M E N T    (ORAL)
1.	The accused/applicant seeks interim bail in case FIR No.591/2024 of PS Narela for offence under Section 103(1)/109(1)/333 /3(5)/238/324/190 of BNS and under Section 25/27 of Arms Act.

2.	This interim bail application has been received in this post-lunch session by way of second supplementary list after mentioning was allowed by Hon’ble Chief Justice.

3.	On the same grounds for interim bail, as raised in the present application, the accused/applicant had filed another bail application which was registered as Bail Application 3960/2026 and that application was dismissed by way of detailed judgment dated 21.09.2026. Despite that, on the same grounds again the present interim bail application has been filed.

4.	It is contended on behalf of accused/applicant that in terms of paragraph 14 of judgment dated 21.09.2026 passed in Bail Application No.3960/2026, certain directions were issued to the jail authorities, but the same have not been complied with, so this fresh interim bail application on same grounds has been filed. 

5.	For convenience, paragraphs 13 & 14 of order dated 21.09.2026 passed in  Bail Application No.3960/2026 are extracted below:

“13. Considering the above circumstances, especially that from record it appears that the accused/applicant did not appear in the April 2026 examination despite having obtained interim bail in April 2026 on that ground, I am not inclined to grant interim bail. The interim bail application and accompanying applications are dismissed. 
14.	However, it is directed that in case the accused/applicant so desires, the concerned Jail Superintendent shall allow him uninterrupted benefit of studying in the jail library from morning till evening and shall also take up, with the concerned Education Board, to arrange examination centre within jail premises itself.”

6.	It is submitted by learned counsel that the accused/applicant was verbally informed by the jail authorities that they have already sent a report to this Court expressing their inability to arrange for the examination centre within jail premises itself. It is submitted by learned counsel that the said report may be requisitioned.

7.	But admittedly, this is not an application seeking initiation of contempt proceedings, otherwise the Court would have looked into the allegation of non-compliance with judgment dated 21.09.2026.

8.	There being no change in circumstances after 21.09.2026 when the earlier interim bail on same grounds as raised in the present application was dismissed by way of detailed judgment, there is no occasion to entertain this second application for grant of interim bail. 

9.	Therefore, the interim bail application and accompanying applications are dismissed.


GIRISH KATHPALIA
     (JUDGE)
SEPTEMBER 29, 2026/ry




BAIL APPLN. 4158/2026		 				             	       Page 3 of 3 pages