Interim Order 48

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: IA No.:15/2026 in CC No.:108/2024, FIR No.:5/2023, PS:ACB
Page 1 of 4
CNR No. DLCT11-001069-2024
CC No. 108/2024
FIR No. 05/2023
PS : ACB
State Vs Raj Singh & Others
IA No.: 15/2026
16.03.2026
Present : Sh. Ravindra Kumar, Ld. Chief PP for State.
Applicant/ accused Raj Singh alongwith
Sh. Ramakant Gaur, Advocate [
Through v/c].
Ms. Harshi Gaur and Ms. Meenakshi Sahu,
Advocates are also present for applicant/ accused.
Heard. File perused.
Report/ Reply to the application under consideration
is filed. Copy supplied.
IO/ACP Jarnail Singh, who is not present today, has
sent written request, stating therein that he is unable to attend this
matter as he has to appear in WP(Crl.) No.8850/2025 before
Hon’ble Delhi High Court.
Arguments on the application heard. Reply perused.
This is an application by applicant/accused Raj Singh seeking
permission to travel abroad
i.e. Kyrgyz Republic from 15.03.2026
to 25.03.2026.
At the outset, it may be noted that while issuing
notice of this application on 13.03.2026, Ld. Counsel of applicant/
accused had stated at Bar that meeting of applicant/ accused is
scheduled in Kyrgyz Republic on 18.03.2026 and on consensus,
notice of this application was issued for today.
Ld. Counsel for applicant/accused submits that the
applicant/ accused has been invited by his business counterpart in
Kyrgyz Republic to discuss and explore the commercial
-- 1 of 4 --
IA No.:15/2026 in CC No.:108/2024, FIR No.:5/2023, PS:ACB
Page 2 of 4
opportunities and to determine the contractual terms and thus, he
is required to visit the said country for a short period commencing
from 18.03.2026 to 28.03.2026. He further submitted that
applicant/accused has a valid Visa to visit Kyrgyz Republic and
no prejudice shall be caused to the prosecution, if he is permitted
to travel abroad during abovesaid period, as the proceedings in the
instant case have already been stayed by the Hon’ble High Court.
It is also pointed out that on earlier two occasions, the
applicant/accused was granted similar permission to travel
abroad
i.e. USA, Dubai (UAE) and Kyrgyzstan, vide orders dated
29.04.2025 and 01.09.2025, passed by Ld. Predecessor of this
Court in IA Nos. 11/2025 and 12/2025 respectively. He also
contended that the applicant/ accused had duly complied with all
the conditions as were imposed by the Court while granting
permission to travel abroad, vide said orders, and had returned
back to India within the permitted period without any violation.
He further submitted that the applicant/ accused undertakes not to
misuse the liberty granted to him and shall return back on time. It
is further submitted that applicant/accused is ready to abide by the
conditions, as may be imposed by this Court.
Ld. Chief PP for State has opposed the application
by submitting that there is an apprehension/possibility that the
applicant/accused may flee out of India, if he is permitted to visit
abroad.
IO has stated in the reply that Flights Schedules to
the proposed destination have been checked online and Air Arabia
& Air Astana operate their flights to the proposed destination
via
Sharjah & Almaty respectively, as also that flights from Sharjah &
Almaty to the proposed destination are not regular and are being
-- 2 of 4 --
IA No.:15/2026 in CC No.:108/2024, FIR No.:5/2023, PS:ACB
Page 3 of 4
cancelled frequently due to ongoing war situations in some
countries.
During the course of arguments, it has not been
disputed on behalf of State that applicant/ accused was previously
granted similar permission to travel abroad
i.e. USA, Dubai (UAE)
and Kyrgyzstan, vide orders 29.04.2025 and 01.09.2025, passed
by Ld. Predecessors of this Court. The applicant/ accused is not
shown to have either misused the liberty of bail granted to him;
and/or violated any of the terms and conditions as were imposed
upon him on said two previous occasions. No specific instance or
ground is mentioned in the reply filed by IO, on the basis of which,
apprehension is raised that the applicant/ accused may flee out of
India in the event of grant of such permission by the Court. At the
same time, the submissions made by Ld. Counsel of applicant/
accused that the applicant/accused may be granted permission to
travel abroad till 28.03.2026, would be beyond the prayer made in
the application in hand. Moreover, the applicant/ accused has not
filed or even produced any document showing justification for
grant of permission to stay out of India beyond 25.03.2026. Hence,
request to that extent, in the opinion of this Court, cannot be
allowed.
In view of the foregoing reasons and the discussions
made hereinabove, the applicant/accused namely Raj Singh is
hereby granted permission to travel abroad
i.e. Kyrgyz Republic
between 18.03.2026 till 25.03.2026, however, subject to the
following conditions:
1. That applicant/accused shall travel only within the
stipulated time;
2. That applicant/accused shall furnish an
-- 3 of 4 --
IA No.:15/2026 in CC No.:108/2024, FIR No.:5/2023, PS:ACB
Page 4 of 4
undertaking that he will not extend his stay in
Kyrgyz Republic after 25-03-2026;
3. The applicant/ accused shall also furnish copies of
his Air Tickets, Mobile number at which he shall
remain available during the aforesaid period and
proposed address of his stay in Kyrgyz Republic
during such period; and
4. The applicant/accused shall keep his provided
mobile number switched on during the aforesaid
period.
Accordingly, application stands disposed of.
Copy of order be given dasti to the
applicant/accused and IO for necessary compliance.
(Vidya Prakash)
Special Judge (PC Act) (ACB)-01
Rouse Avenue Court Complex
New Delhi/16.03.2026(r)
-- 4 of 4 --