Neha Sood v. The State (Govt. Of NCT Of Delhi)

$~6 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ NEHA SOOD .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Abhimanyu Kumar, Mr. RD Singh and Mr. Milan, Advocates.

versus THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through:

Ms. Shubhi Gupta, APP for State.

Mr. Rajat Katyal, Mr. Kunal Makhija and Ms. Anushka Verma, Advocates for complainant along with AR of complainant.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI

O R D E R

% 12.01.2026 By way of the present petition under section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 0132/2022 dated 03.09.2022 registered under sections 406/409/420/120-B of Indian Penal Code 1860 ('IPC') at P.S.: Economic Offences Wing, Delhi. 2.

Notice on this petition was issued vide order dated 18.11.2025. 3.

Status Report dated 07.01.2026 has been handed-up in court. The same is perused and taken on record.

4.

The court has heard Mr. Abhimanyu Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner; Ms. Shubhi Gupta, learned APP for the The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

State; as well as Mr. Rajat Katyal, learned counsel appearing for the complainant.

5.

Mr. Kumar submits, that as would be seen from a perusal of the subject FIR, the petitioner has not been named as a suspect/accused therein; and that the gravamen of the allegations in the subject FIR is the misrouting and mis-utilisation of the funds received by M/s R.N. Automobiles acting as Direct Selling Agents ('DSA') of M/s Hero Fincorp Ltd. ('HFCL').

6.

Mr. Kumar submits that it is not disputed that the petitioner is not a partner of M/s R.N. Automobiles.

7.

Learned counsel submits, that the reason the petitioner in under investigation in the subject FIR is the allegation that she has received a portion of the misappropriated funds in her bank accounts; and that her husband has misused such monies to purchase jewellery in her name and an immovable property in their joint names. 8.

Most importantly, Mr. Kumar submits, that the petitioner's husband, who is named in the subject FIR, has already been admitted to regular bail by the learned trial court vidé order dated 17.10.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-03, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi.

9.

It is argued, that in these circumstances, the petitioner deserves to be granted anticipatory bail.

10.

On the other hand, opposing the grant of anticipatory bail, Ms. Gupta, learned APP submits, that investigation qua the petitioner is not yet complete; for which reason chargesheet dated 22.12.2025 has been filed in the matter only against the petitioner's husband. Learned APP The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

further submits, that as narrated inter-alia in paras 16.14, 16.18 and 16.20 of the chargesheet, the petitioner is one of the beneficiaries of the funds that were misrouted and mis-utilisedand is therefore one of the beneficiaries of the fruits of crime. Ms. Gupta submits, that as narrated in their status report, investigation in the matter has revealed that during the period when the petitioner's husband was absconding, the petitioner alongwith other co-accused persons visited the offices of M/s R.N. Automobiles and oversaw the destruction of evidence; and it is believed that she is in possession of a pen-drive which contains data relating to the business of the partnership concern. 11.

Upon being queried, learned APP however confirms, that the petitioner is not one of the partners of M/s R.N. Automobiles; and that the petitioner's husband, Rajiv Grover, who is one of the main accused persons in the matter, has already been admitted to regular bail vidé order dated 17.10.2025 passed by the learned ASJ. 12.

Adopting the submissions made by the learned APP, Mr. Katyal appearing for the complainant submits, that since the petitioner is one of a beneficiaries of the monies defalcated, she does not deserve any indulgence.

13.

Upon a conspectus of the facts and circumstances obtaining in the matter, it is seen that the essence of the allegation against the petitioner is that her husband has purchased an immovable property in their joint names, and has also bought some jewellery for her, using the allegedly defalcated monies; and noticing that her husband, being one of the main accused, is already on regular bail, this court is inclined to allow the present petition.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

14.

It is accordingly directed that in the event of her arrest, the petitioner shall be admitted to bail by the Investigating Officer ('I.O')/Arresting Officer ('A.O') subject to the following conditions: 14.1. The petitioner shall furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs. One Lac Only) with 02 sureties in the like amount from family members to the satisfaction of the I.O./A.O.;

14.2. The petitioner shall furnish to the I.O. a cellphone number on which the petitioner may be contacted at any time and shall ensure that the number is kept active and switched-on at all times;

14.3. If the petitioner has a passport, she shall surrender the same to the I.O. and shall not travel out of the country without prior permission of this court;

14.4. The petitioner shall not contact, nor visit, nor offer any inducement, threat or promise to any of the prosecution witnesses or other persons acquainted with the facts of case. The petitioner shall not tamper with evidence nor otherwise indulge in any act or omission that is unlawful or that would prejudice the proceedings in the pending trial. 15.

The petition stands disposed-of in the above terms. 16.

Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed-of. ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J JANUARY 12, 2026 ss The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.