Gurpreet Singh v. State Of Govt NCT Of Delhi
$~5 *
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ GURPREET SINGH .....Applicant Through:
Mr. Mohit Tanaja, Mr.
Kamal Kishor and Mr.
Nirmal Tiwari, Advocates.
versus STATE OF GOVT NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through:
Mr. Sunil Kumar Gautam, APP for the State with SI Yashveer Sharma, PS Govind Puri.
Mr. Manoj Bhati, Mr.
Sachin Bidhuri, Ms. Nidhi, Advocates for Complainant along with Complainant in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN
O R D E R
% 14.08.2025 1.
The present bail application is filed by the applicant seeking pre-arrest bail in FIR No. 424/2024 dated 10.08.2024, registered at Police Station Govind Puri for the offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('IPC'). 2.
By order dated 01.04.2025, interim protection was granted to the applicant on him joining and co-operating in the investigation. It is not disputed that the applicant has since joined investigation.
3.
The FIR was registered pursuant to a complaint alleging that a sum of ₹13 lakhs was fraudulently taken from Bajaj Finance Limited as loan in the name of the complainant. When the Bajaj Finance company's personnels came to the house of the complainant for recovery of the aforesaid loan, it was found that The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
the amount was disbursed to one Rashmi Jain whereas the loan was shown to have been taken by the complainant. 4.
It is alleged that Bajaj Finance had disbursed the loan amount on mortgaging a four-wheeler which is stated to be belonging to the applicant.
5.
Undisputedly, the amount was disbursed in the account of one Rashmi Jain. It is not the case of the prosecution that the applicant in any manner was the beneficiary of the amount which is taken from the Bajaj Finance as loan.
6.
It is stated that the accused Rashmi Jain has since been absconding. In such circumstances, whether the applicant conspired with accused Rashmi Jain can only be ascertained after the evidence is led. Unnecessary implication of the applicant cannot be ruled out and Custodial interrogation of the applicant at this stage is not required when the applicant has joined investigation.
7.
It is not in doubt that an order for grant of pre-arrest bail cannot be passed in a routine manner so as to allow the accused to use the same as a shield. At the same time, it cannot be denied that great amount of humiliation and disgrace is attached with the arrest. In cases where the accused has joined investigation, he is cooperating with the Investigating Agency and is not likely to abscond, the custodial interrogation should be avoided. 8.
Appropriate conditions can be imposed to allay any apprehensions of the applicant misusing the liberty or tampering with evidence.
9.
In view of the above, in the event of arrest, the applicant is directed to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond for a sum of ₹25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount, subject to The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
the satisfaction of the concerned SHO, on the following conditions:
a.
The applicant shall join and cooperate with the investigation, if required, as and when directed by the IO; b.
The applicant shall not leave the country without the prior permission of the learned Trial Court;
c.
The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case or tamper with the evidence of the case, in any manner whatsoever; d.
The applicant shall appear before the learned Trial Court as and when directed;
e.
The applicant shall provide the address where he is residing and shall not change the address without informing the concerned IO/SHO;
f.
The applicant shall give his mobile number to the concerned IO/SHO and shall keep his mobile phone switched on at all times.
10.
In the event of there being any violation of the stipulated conditions, it would be open to the State to seek redressal by filing an application seeking cancellation of the bail. 11.
It is clarified that the observations made in the present order are for the purpose of deciding the present bail application, and should not influence the outcome of the Trial and should not be taken, as an expression of opinion, on the merits of the case. 12.
The present bail application is allowed in the aforesaid terms.
AMIT MAHAJAN, J AUGUST 14, 2025/ DU The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.