STATE OF DELHI vs SAHIL GOHAR — 390/2026
Case under Indian Arms Act 1959 Section 25/54/59. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 23rd March 2026.
Bail Matters
CNR: DLCT010036482026
Filing Number
1282/2026
Filing Date
25-Feb-2026
Registration No
390/2026
Registration Date
25-Feb-2026
Court
District and Sessions Judge, Central, THC
Judge
33-Special Judge (Ndps)
Decision Date
23-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED
Last updated 10-Jun-2026
FIR Details
FIR Number
10
Police Station
Crime Branch-Central Delhi
Year
2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.STATE OF DELHI
Respondent(s)
-
1.SAHIL GOHAR
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
23-Mar-2026
Copy Of OrderView PDF
Summary: The court dismissed Sahil Kumar Gohar's second anticipatory bail application in an illegal arms case under the Arms Act. The applicant was alleged to be the supplier of a semi-automatic pistol recovered from co-accused Sagar Babbar, with evidence suggesting a second pistol remained in his possession. The court found the allegations serious and determined that custodial interrogation was necessary for investigating the case, recovering remaining weapons, and identifying other accused persons. No change in circumstances justified granting bail after the previous application's dismissal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
23-Mar-2026
Disposed
Special Judge (Ndps)
-
19-Mar-2026
For Bail
Special Judge (Ndps)
-
18-Mar-2026
Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF
-
18-Mar-2026
For Bail
Additional Sessions Judge - 05
-
14-Mar-2026
Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF
-
14-Mar-2026
For Bail
Special Judge (Ndps)
-
02-Mar-2026
For Bail
Special Judge (Ndps)
-
26-Feb-2026
Copy Of OrderView PDF
-
26-Feb-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
25-Feb-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 390/2026
Summary: The court dismissed Sahil Kumar Gohar's second anticipatory bail application in an illegal arms case under the Arms Act. The applicant was alleged to be the supplier of a semi-automatic pistol recovered from co-accused Sagar Babbar, with evidence suggesting a second pistol remained in his possession. The court found the allegations serious and determined that custodial interrogation was necessary for investigating the case, recovering remaining weapons, and identifying other accused persons. No change in circumstances justified granting bail after the previous application's dismissal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts