New Delhi [India], July 30 (ANI): Delhi Patiala House Court on Tuesday rejected the anticipatory bail plea of Delhi State Youth Congress president Akshay Lakra. He sought an anticipatory bail in a case of alleged attempt to murder.

An FIR was registered on July 24, 2025, at the Barakhamba Road police station on the complaint filed by Ratan Ranjan, a stand-up comedian.

Ratan Ranjan has alleged that an attempt was made on his life at the BJP head office by the accused persons in a car. First, he was tried to be abducted. When this failed, he was tried to be killed by being run over by a car.

Interestingly, an FIR was lodged against Ratan Ranjan also in Telangana for allegedly using a morphed image of Rahul Gandhi in a social media post. An FIR is also registered at Bangalore, Karnataka.

Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Chander Jit Singh rejected the anticipatory bail plea after hearing submissions and considering the material placed on record, including CCTV footage.

Delhi police filed a reply opposing the plea and stating that the custodial interrogation of Akshay Lakra is required.

'In the report filed on behalf of the State, multiple grounds have been cited opposing the bail, although, in oral arguments, only the point regarding recovery of the vehicle is stated, but the court cannot be oblivious to the other points raised in the written report. One such point is the requirement of custodial interrogation to uncover any conspiracy,' ASJ Singh said in the order passed on July 29.

The plea was opposed by the public prosecutor for the State. Senior advocate Anil Soni, alongwith Advocates Neeraj and Kishan Nautiyal, appeared for the complainant.

It was contended by counsel for the accused that in a case where the accused is not required for custodial interrogation, he can be granted bail. The court rejected these arguments.

'The CCTV footage bears prima facie testimony in support of allegations made by the complainant,' ASJ Singh said in the order.

It was submitted by the counsels for Akshay Lakra that the FIR is the counterblast of the Complaint filed by him against the complainant at IP Estate on July 24.

It was also argued that the Lakra, being an advocate, deserves protection from arbitrary arrest as the case is politically motivated. It was also submitted that section 109 BNS (Attempt to murder) is completely unsustainable, being misconceived. The complainant has not suffered any injury.

It was also argued that the complainant was not in front of in the centre of the car. He was on the right side of the car.

The court rejected the contention of the Defence counsel and said that it seems that it is sought to be argued that there was no such situation where the complainant could have suffered any injury.

The court further stated that, according to the report, the Complainant had managed to escape. This contention is corroborated by the CCTV footage.

'It is not imperative that a person should be in the centre of a vehicle to be run over or hit by a vehicle. A collision at high speed is apparently sufficient to cause injuries which may end the life of the victim,' ASJ Singh pointed out.

He said, 'Therefore, the argument of the applicant regarding the complainant/victim being on one side regarding the vehicle attempting to run over the victim, especially when the complainant states that he was trying to escape, is of no consequence.' (ANI)