Order 4

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: CNR No. DLCT11-001288-2025
CC No. 43/2025
FIR No. 08/2021
PS : ACB
State Vs Naresh Kumar, Etc.
21.02.2026
Present : Sh. Ravindra Kumar, Ld. Chief PP for State.
Accused persons namely Naresh Kumar, Sandeep
Kadyan and Gulshan Mahtta on bail, are present.
Accused Dinesh Kumar (not arrested during
investigation) in person.
Sh. Aditya Kaushik and Sh. Aman Sharma, Ld. Counsels
for accused persons namely Naresh Kumar (A-1) and
Sandeep Kadyan (A-2).
(Fresh Vakalatnama is filed on behalf of A-1 & A-2
and same is taken on record).
Sh. Mohd. Fareed and Sh. Sajid, Ld. Counsels for
accused namely Dinesh Kumar (A-4).
(Fresh Vakalatnama is filed on behalf of A-4 and
same is taken on record).
Copies of the charge-sheet alongwith relevant
documents and CD of e-challan have been supplied to all the four
accused persons against proper receipt.
An application u/s 439 Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail is
moved by accused Dinesh Kumar.
Issue notice of the application to State.
Ld. Chief PP has accepted notice of the application on
behalf of State.
Arguments on the bail application heard. Record
perused.
After referring to the allegations appearing in the
chargesheet and the material filed therewith, Ld. Counsel for the
applicant/accused has argued that there is no allegation of demand or
acceptance of bribe against the applicant, without which, offences u/s
7/7A of P.C. Act do not get attracted against him; he has been falsely
implicated in this case; co-accused persons namely Naresh Kumar,
Sandeep Kadyan and Gulshan Mahtta have already been granted bail
Page 1 of 3
-- 1 of 3 --
in this matter; the applicant was never arrested during investigation
and he has been chargesheeted only on the basis of circumstantial
evidence. It is further argued that the applicant has clean antecedents
and is having deep roots into the society and since trial is likely to take
considerable time, he may be granted regular bail in this case. In
support of his submissions, Ld. Counsel has also relied upon
“Satender Kumar Antil Vs CBI & Anr., MA No. 2034 of 2022 in MA
No. 1849 of 2021 in Special Leave Petition (CRL.) No. 5191 of 2021”
and “Neeraj Dutta Vs State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi), Crl. Appeal No.
1669 of 2009 decided on 17.03.2023 by Hon’ble Supreme Court of
India”.
Per contra, the bail application has been opposed by Ld.
Chief PP for State on the ground that the applicant/accused, while he
was posted as MLO in Wazirpur Authority, had furnished details of
co-accused Gulshan Mahatta to the complainant, with direction to
complainant to meet said co-accused concerning his file. It is further
argued that the applicant/accused had demanded bribe of Rs.70,000/-
through co-accused persons and he may abscond, if granted bail by the
Court.
Indisputably, the applicant/accused was never arrested
during investigation, which would show that the applicant/accused
had duly cooperated during the course of investigation. Hence, he is
not required for the purpose of investigation. Moreover, co-accused
persons have already been granted bail in this case. Trial may take
considerable time and thus, no useful purpose would be served by
sending the accused behind the bar.
After considering the overall facts and circumstances of
the present case and in view of the discussion made herein above, the
applicant/accused is admitted to bail, subject to furnishing personal
bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like amount,
subject to the following conditions : -
Page 2 of 3
-- 2 of 3 --
(i) That the applicant/accused shall not try to contact or
influence, directly or indirectly, complainant or any other
witness of present case and shall not tamper with
evidence;
(ii) That applicant/accused shall not misuse the liberty of
bail by indulging in commission of similar offence(s) in
future;
(iii) That applicant/accused shall appear before the Court
on each and every date of hearing, when so required;
(iv) That applicant/accused shall not leave the country
without prior permission of the Court;
(v) That applicant/accused shall intimate to the Court in
case of change of his residential address; and,
(vi) In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid
conditions imposed by the Court, it shall be open for the
State to apply for cancellation of bail being granted to
the accused herein.
The bail application stands disposed off in the aforesaid
terms.
Accordingly, bail bonds furnished on behalf of accused
Dinesh Kumar and same have been accepted.
Put up on 16.03.2026 for scrutiny of documents and for
arguments on the point of charge.
Date is given as per convenience of Ld. Counsels for
accused persons.
(Vidya Prakash)
Special Judge, PC Act (ACB)-01
RACC, New Delhi.
21.02.2026(a)
Page 3 of 3
-- 3 of 3 --