Danish v. State Of N.C.T Of Delhi

$~8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 609/2026 DANISH .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Mritunjay Kumar Singh, Mr.

Saikat Khatua, Mr. Mukesh Singh Rawat and Ms. Soumya Mishra, Advocates versus STATE OF N.C.T OF DELHI .....Respondent Through:

Mr. Manoj Pant, APP for the State with SI Hardeep Dhull, P.S. Cyber Cell, Outer District Mr. Amritanshu Rai, Mr. Rohit Verma and Mr. Sandeep Kumar, Advocates for complainant

CORAM:

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA

O R D E R

% 16.04.2026 1.

By way of the present application, the applicant seeks grant of regular bail in case arising out of FIR bearing no. 77/2025, registered at Police Station Cyber Cell, Outer District, Delhi for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 61(2)/318(4)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereafter 'BNS').

2.

Briefly stated, the facts of the present case are that the present case arises out of an online complaint lodged on the NCRP Portal by the complainant, who is engaged in the business of ball bearings and has been The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

importing goods from China through a supplier with whom he communicated via WhatsApp. It is alleged that the complainant received a WhatsApp message purportedly from his supplier directing him to transfer a sum of Rs. 15,00,000/- into multiple bank accounts, which he accordingly deposited in tranches. However, upon subsequent verification, the said supplier denied having made any such request, thereby revealing that the complainant had been duped through a fraudulent communication. 3.

During investigation, on the basis of technical surveillance and analysis of financial transactions, one Janardan Verma, in whose bank account a substantial portion of the defrauded amount was credited, was identified and examined. He disclosed that he had provided his bank account to the present accused Danish in lieu of monetary commission and had assisted in the withdrawal of the defrauded funds from various bank branches, which were thereafter handed over to the said accused, pursuant to which the present FIR came to be registered 4.

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant argues that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and has been in judicial custody since 01.12.2025. It is contended that neither any amount has been recovered from the applicant nor any incriminating material has been recovered from his possession. It is further submitted that the name of the applicant has surfaced only on the basis of disclosure statements. It is further argued that the investigation qua the present applicant stands complete, and no useful purpose would be served by continued incarceration. Learned counsel also contends that a co-accused, attributed with a more serious role in the alleged offence, has already been granted bail. On these grounds, it is prayed that the applicant be enlarged on regular The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

bail 5.

Per contra, learned APP for the State argues that the present applicant/ accused was in direct contact with Chinese nationals and is alleged to have committed cyber fraud in connivance with them, actively participating in an organized cybercrime network. His Telegram and WhatsApp chats were seized during the investigation. Call Detail Records location of mobile numbers recovered from Danish and co-accused Janardan Verma establish that both were present at the same location at the time of the withdrawal of the disputed amount through cheque on 30.09.2025. Considering the gravity of the offence, if the applicant is released on bail, he may abscond, tamper with digital and documentary evidence, influence witnesses, and potentially reoffend. In view of the aforesaid submissions, it is prayed that the present application seeking grant of regular bail be dismissed.

6.

This Court has heard arguments addressed on behalf of the applicant as well as the State, and has perused the case file. 7.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the material available on record, this Court notes that, although serious allegations have been levelled against the present applicant, no recovery of the alleged defrauded amount or any incriminating case property has been effected from his possession. It is further pertinent to note that the recovery in the present case has been effected from co-accused Janardan Verma, who has already been granted bail by the learned Trial Court vide order dated 27.12.2025.

8.

This Court further takes into account that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 01.12.2025, i.e., for a period of about five months. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

The charges in this case are yet to be framed, indicating that the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. However it is not in dispute that the applicant is a 24 years old boy with no previous criminal antecedents. 9.

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that no recovery has been affected from the present applicant, and that the co-accused from whom the recovery has been affected have already been granted bail, this Court is inclined to grant regular bail to the applicant, on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.15,000/- with one surety of the like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court/Successor Court/Link Court/Duty Judge concerned on the following terms and conditions:

i) The applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the concerned Court and if the applicant has a passport, he shall surrender the same to the concerned trial court.

ii) In case of change of residential address/contact details, the applicant shall promptly inform the same to the concerned Court and IO/SHO concerned.

iii) The applicant shall appear regularly before the learned Trial Court, unless exempted.

iv) The applicant shall not communicate with, or come into contact with the complainant or any of the prosecution witnesses, or tamper with the evidence of the case. 10.

Accordingly, the present bail application stands disposed of. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

11.

It is, however, clarified that nothing expressed hereinabove shall tantamount to an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 12.

The order be uploaded on the website forthwith. DR. SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J APRIL 16, 2026/ns GJ The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.