Pankaj Kumar v. State NCT Of Dehi
$~6 *
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ PANKAJ KUMAR .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Sameer Dewan, Mr. Bharat, Advocates.
versus STATE NCT OF DEHI .....Respondent Through:
Mr. Yudhvir Singh Chauhan, APP.
SI Ashok, PS-Rajouri Garden, SI Ashish, PS-Kirti Nagar.
Ms. Ishu Kanwal, Advocate for complainant with Mr. Amit Kr.
Mishra.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN
O R D E R
% 24.03.2026 1.
By way of this bail application, the applicant seeks anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No. 330/2025, dated 04.06.2025, registered at Police Station Rajouri Garden, for offences punishable under Sections 318(4) and 316(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ["BNS"]. 2.
The FIR was registered at the instance of Ms. Sarika Kumari Mishra. It is alleged that she and her husband are the owners of property bearing No. C-15, Ground Floor, Tagore Garden Extension, New Delhi110027, which was rented out to Ms. Jyoti Sharma, vide an agreement dated 07.09.2024. It is further alleged that the tenant failed to pay rent in a timely manner, whereupon the complainant requested her to vacate the premises. However, despite some accommodation extended by the owners of the premises, the tenant did not vacate the premises. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
3.
The FIR is predicated on the allegation that Ms. Jyoti Sharma dishonestly and fraudulently prepared and executed a forged agreement to sell/bayana and a possession letter, both dated 15.01.2025, to falsely project that the property had been sold by the owners to her. 4.
Ms. Jyoti Sharma and another co-accused, Mr. Rahul Saluja, were arrested on 11.09.2025.
5.
The aforesaid Ms. Jyoti Sharma had also filed a civil suit against the complainant and her husband. I am informed that the said civil suit was subsequently withdrawn on 27.09.2025.
6.
Insofar as the present applicant is concerned, the allegations against him are based upon a statement made by the co-accused, Ms. Jyoti Sharma, which has been summarised in the status report as follows: "9. That during further investigation, accused Jyoti Sharma D/o Mulkhraj Arora and Rahul Saluja S/o Narender Saluja were arrested on 11.09.2025. In her disclosure, accused Jyoti Sharma stated that due to lack of funds she was unable to pay rent and had approached her lawyer Gautam Malik to prepare the forged Agreement to Sell/Bayana and Possession Letter dated 15.01.2025. She further disclosed that she handed over these forged documents to petitioner/co-accused Pankaj Ved @ Pinka, who thereafter forged the signatures of the complainant and her husband with intent to commit fraud and deceive them. That after finalized of the investigation, the charge-sheet has been filed before the learned Trial Court. The next date of hearing is 25.02.2026 for Miscellaneous Appearance. The case is presently at the initial stage of trial and charges are yet to be framed." [Emphasis supplied.] 7.
Mr. Sameer Dewan, learned counsel for the applicant, submits that the applicant is willing to join the investigation and cooperate fully, including by providing his handwriting sample for verification in relation to the allegation of forgery levelled against him. He further submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case by Ms. Jyoti The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
Sharma, as there exists a monetary dispute between them, in respect of which the applicant had approached the Station House Officer, Police Station Rajouri Garden on 24.02.2022. A copy of the said complaint is annexed with the present bail application.
8.
Mr. Yudhvir Singh Chauhan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, and Ms. Ishu Kanwal, learned counsel for the complainant, submit that the investigation is still pending, insofar as the applicant is concerned, although a chargesheet has been filed against the other coaccused referred to in the status report, namely Ms. Jyoti Sharma, Mr. Rahul Saluja, and Mr. Gautam Malik. It is further stated that all the aforesaid co-accused have been granted regular bail by the learned Sessions Court.
9.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that it is appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant in the present case, subject to his joining and cooperating with the investigation. The principal accused, namely Ms. Jyoti Sharma, alongwith co-accused Mr. Rahul Saluja and Mr. Gautam Malik, are already on bail, albeit in some case, after the filing of the chargesheet against them. 10.
Insofar as the present applicant is concerned, the case against him is based solely on the disclosure statement of the co-accused, Ms. Jyoti Sharma, with whom he is stated to have had a pre-existing monetary dispute. The applicant has undertaken to cooperate with the investigation, including by voluntarily furnishing his handwriting sample to enable verification of the allegation that he forged the signatures of the complainant and her husband.
11.
For the aforesaid reasons, it is directed that in the event of arrest in The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
connection with the impugned FIR, the applicant shall be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 35,000/- alongwith one surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer/Station House Officer, subject to the following conditions: a) The applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer on 27.03.2026 at 04:00 PM, and thereafter as and when required by the Investigating Officer. It is noted that the applicant has voluntarily undertaken to provide his handwriting sample. b) The applicant shall furnish his mobile number to the Investigating Officer and shall keep the said mobile phone operational and switched on at all times. The mobile number shall not be changed, nor shall the phone be switched off, without prior intimation to the Investigating Officer.
c) The applicant shall furnish his residential address to the Investigating Officer and shall not change the same without prior intimation to the Investigating Officer.
d) The applicant shall not influence the complainant, any member of her family, or any witness in the case.
e) The applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, tamper with the evidence, nor shall he indulge in any act or omission that may prejudice the investigation.
f) The applicant shall not commit any offence during the pendency of these proceedings.
12.
The bail application is disposed of in these terms. 13.
It is clarified that the observations made herein are solely for the purpose of adjudication of the present bail application and shall not be The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case, nor shall they prejudice the rights and contentions of the parties at any stage of the proceedings.
PRATEEK JALAN, J MARCH 24, 2026 'Bhupi'/SD/ The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.