Sanjay Dwivedi vs. State Of Delhi Nct
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
O R D E R % 02.09.2026
This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. CRL.M.A. 7454/2026 (exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application is disposed of. BAIL APPLN. 977/2026
By way of the present application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the “BNSS”), the Applicant seeks grant of anticipatory bail in FIR No. 286/2018 registered at Police Station Samaipur Badli under Sections 420/506/120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as the “IPC”)
Learned counsel for the Applicant submits that the FIR in question was registered in the year 2018 and that, for nearly eight years thereafter, the This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/09/2026 at 11:27:32
Applicant was neither arrested nor served with any notice. It is submitted that the Applicant received a notice only in the year 2026. Learned counsel further submits that the existence of the second FIR was disclosed to the Applicant only before the learned Trial Court and that he was not aware of the same, as no notice had ever been served upon him in that case either.
Learned counsel for the Applicant further submits that, pursuant to the interim protection granted by this Court, the Applicant has joined the investigation and has furnished his specimen signatures as well as the relevant documents. It is submitted that the allegations arise out of a commercial transaction and that the case is primarily based upon documentary evidence already available with the investigating agency. It is, therefore, contended that custodial interrogation of the Applicant is not required. Learned counsel also submits that the principal accused has already been granted police bail.
Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the complainant submits that the delay in the investigation cannot be attributed to the complainant, who has been approaching the authorities for the last eight years, but no effective action was taken on his complaint. It is submitted that the matter remained pending on account of the inaction of the police.
Learned counsel for the complainant further submits that the Applicant has adopted the same modus operandi in another transaction. It is submitted that the Applicant entered into an agreement to sell the plant, machinery and sheds of M/s Rathi Ispat for a total sale consideration of ₹4,55,11,000/-, against which the complainant paid an advance amount of approximately ₹2.51 crores through various modes. It is alleged that, subsequently, the Applicant entered into another agreement to sell the same plant, machinery and sheds with another company and received an advance amount of ₹20 This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/09/2026 at 11:27:32
lakhs, resulting in registration of another FIR.
Learned counsel for the complainant further submits that the aforesaid plant, machinery and sheds had already been mortgaged with Punjab National Bank and, despite being aware of the subsisting mortgage, the Applicant entered into agreements to sell the same property with the complainant and other persons. It is further submitted that the learned Sessions Court has already made observations regarding the manner in which police bail was granted to a co-accused in the FIR registered under Section 420 of the IPC.
Learned APP for the State submits that the co-accused who has been granted police bail was duly investigated. During investigation, the said co- accused produced GST bills showing that the material had been supplied to the present Applicant. It is further submitted that the payment was received by the present Applicant and not by the said co-accused. The said co-accused had received an amount of ₹9.5 lakhs, in respect of which he produced the relevant GST bills.
The Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.
The allegations against the present Applicant are serious in nature. No doubt, there is a considerable gap of approximately eight years between the registration of the FIR and the issuance of the notice to the Applicant. However, the delay in the investigation, by itself, cannot enure to the benefit of the Applicant when the complainant submits that despite repeatedly approaching the authorities, no effective action was taken on his complaint. The complainant cannot be penalised for the alleged laxity on the part of the investigating agency.
It is also relevant that there is another FIR involving the Applicant This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/09/2026 at 11:27:32
wherein allegations have been made regarding adoption of a similar modus operandi and receipt of money pursuant to another transaction concerning the same plant, machinery and sheds.
Having regard to the nature and gravity of the allegations, the allegations of the Applicant having entered into agreements in respect of property which was already mortgaged, the receipt of substantial amounts pursuant to the alleged transactions, and the allegations arising in the second FIR involving a similar modus operandi, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the Applicant.
Accordingly, the present application is dismissed.
The order be uploaded on the website forthwith. MADHU JAIN, J SEPTEMBER 2, 2026/prg/P This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/09/2026 at 11:27:32
Reproduced from the public record of the Delhi High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.