Satish Kumar v. State(NCT Of Delhi)
$~10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 4694/2025 SATISH KUMAR ..... Applicant Through:
Mr. Kunal Sharma, Ms. Mehaq Rao, Mr.
Yash Punjab, Mr. Himanshu Sharma ad Mr. Himanshu Maru, Advs.
versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through:
Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya, APP for the State with Ms. Vanshika Singh and Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE
O R D E R
% 25.02.2026 1.
By virtue of the present application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), the applicant seeks grant of regular bail in proceedings arising out of FIR No.63/2024 dated 29.05.2024 registered at PS.: Economic Offences Wing under Sections 406/420/467/468/471/120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). 2.
As per FIR, on 31.07.2023, Deutsche Bank AG, New Delhi Branch, lodged a complaint alleging fraud by M/s. Satsai International Designer Pvt. Ltd. and its Directors namely Sumit Kumar, Satish Kumar (present applicant), Asha Devi, and Anita alleging that the said company had availed and subsequently enhanced loan credit facilities from the Bank between 2019 and 2021, secured by mortgage of two properties in Dwarka, with original title deeds deposited and charges duly registered with CERSAI and the ROC. After regular servicing until September 2022, the loan accounts were declared NPA on 14.12.2022 with a total The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
outstanding amount exceeding Rs.4 Crores, leading to SARFAESI proceedings and symbolic possession. During enforcement, the Bank discovered that despite holding the original title deeds, the said mortgaged properties had allegedly been pledged to other lenders including PNB Housing Finance Limited, Hero Fincorp Limited, and Yes Bank Limited through related parties/ entities, indicating creation of parallel charges to secure multiple loans. The company has since shut down its operations and the Directors are absconding.
3.
Of the many grounds raised by the applicant herein, learned counsel for the applicant only submits that since the applicant, a senior citizen, has been in judicial custody since 17.04.2025, i.e. for more than ten months; the chargesheet has already been filed on 10.07.2025; the investigation qua the applicant is long concluded in all respects; the trial is not likely to conclude in the foreseeable future; the prosecution's case primarily rests on documentary evidence, and the specimen signatures, handwriting samples and other relevant specimens of the applicant have already been obtained and sent to the FSL, the report whereof is awaited, no further custodial interrogation of the applicant is warranted, the applicant is entitled to grant of regular bail. Additionally, the original title deeds are in the custody of the prosecution and no further recovery remains to be effected, leaving no possibility of tampering with evidence. 4.
Lastly, as per learned counsel since the applicant has already been granted bail in FIR No.185/2022 by the learned Trial Court vide order dated 20.02.2026, his continued incarceration is wholly unwarranted and he deserves to be released on bail. To buttress the aforesaid, reliance is placed upon Ajay Khera vs. State of GNCTD 2023 SCC OnLine Del The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
2249; Javed Gulam Nabi vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. SLP (Crl.) No.3809/2024 and Udhaw Singh vs. Enforcement Directorate SLP (Crl.) No.799/2025.
5.
Per contra, Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya learned APP for the State relying upon the Status Report handed over in Court, which is taken on record, submits that since the matter pertains to a grave economic offence involving cheating of approximately Rs.3.36 Crores, in which the applicant is stated to be a beneficiary as also having played a central role in the conspiracy; the supplementary investigation is still pending with regard to the diversion of funds; his son and another co-accused are presently absconding; and he is also involved in another case bearing FIR No.185/2022 relating to similar offences and his failure to cooperate in disclosing the whereabouts of the co-accused persons, the applicant does not deserve to be released on bail.
6.
This Court has heard the learned counsel for the applicant as also the learned APP for the State and perused the documents on record as also the Status Report and judgments cited at bar. 7.
The facts reveal that the investigation in the present matter is already concluded, and though the chargesheet was filed as far back as 10.07.2025 charges are yet to be framed. Also, the case of the prosecution predominantly rests on documentary evidence, and the specimen signatures, handwriting samples and other relevant specimens of the applicant which have already been obtained and the FSL results is awaited. Further, the above may take prolongated time. Moreover, the applicant is a senior citizen. Further, since the charges have not yet been framed and the trial is likely to take a considerable period of time, hence, The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
it would not be judicious to keep the applicant in judicial custody for an indefinite duration, pending conclusion of trial. 8.
Taking the aforesaid cumulatively, even though his son and another co-accused are presently absconding and there is another FIR for similar offence is pending, further presence of the applicant in judicial custody and/ or his interrogation may not be necessary. Also, even though the applicant is involved in economic offences involving cheating to the tune of approximately Rs.3.36 Crores, and that such offences are undoubtedly serious in nature, however, it is well settled that the gravity or magnitude of the alleged offence, by itself, cannot be the sole ground for denial of bail and the fate of the bail application must rest on the overall facts and circumstances involved.
9.
Accordingly, the applicant is granted regular bail in FIR No.63/2024 dated 29.05.2024 registered at PS.: Economic Offences Wing under Sections 406/420/467/468/471/120B of the IPC. As such, the applicant be released on regular bail subject to him furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) along with one surety of the like amount by a family member/ friend having no criminal case pending against him and further subject to satisfaction of the learned Trial Court and subject to the following conditions:- a) Applicant shall not leave NCT of Delhi without prior permission of the concerned Court and shall ordinarily reside at the address as per TCR.
b) Applicant shall surrender his Passport, if any, to the IO within three days of his release.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
c) Applicant shall join and participate in the investigation as and when called by the IO.
d) Applicant shall provide all his mobile numbers to the IO concerned which shall be kept in working condition at all times. e) Applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity and shall not contact any of the prosecution witnesses, or tamper with the evidence of the case.
10.
Accordingly, the present application is allowed and disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
11.
A copy of this order be sent to the learned Trial Court and concerned Jail Superintendent for necessary information and compliance thereof.
12.
Needless to say, since the expression of opinion, if any, are for the purposes of adjudicating the present application only, they shall have no bearing on the overall merits/ trial involved. SAURABH BANERJEE, J FEBRUARY 25, 2026/Ab The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.