Final Order 2

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: FIR No. 58/2026
	PS Cyber New Delhi
	State Vs. Lalit Bhati
1/4
Bail Matter No. 1338/2026
State Vs. Lalit Bhati
FIR No. 58/2026
PS Cyber New Delhi
U/sec 318(4)/319/340 BNS
12.06.2026
This is an application under section 483 BNSS for grant of regular bail moved
on behalf of accused/applicant Lalit Bhati.
Present: Sh. Shiv Kumar, Ld. Addl. PP for the State.
Sh. Binay Singh and Ms. Pooja Sharma, ld. Counsels for
accused/applicant.
Complainant J. P. Singh is present.
IO SI Rajesh is also present.
Arguments on application are heard.
ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF ACCUSED/APPLICANT
1. It is argued on behalf of accused/applicnt that he has been falsely
implicated in this case and he is in JC since 22.03.2026. It is further argued that
he has no role in the alleged icident. Case property has already been recovered
in this case but not at the instance of accused/applicant. It is further submitted
that no offence is made out against the accused/applicant. He has never shared
his bank account details with any one nor he demanded any money from the
complainant. It is further submitted that complainant himself transferred money
to a phone number which is easily accessible through online payment
applications. It is further submitted that alleged amount and concerned account
has already been recovered by the police. It is further submitted that
investigation against accused/applicant has already been completed and no
useful purpose would be served in keeping accused/applicant in custody. It is
-- 1 of 4 --
FIR No. 58/2026
	PS Cyber New Delhi
	State Vs. Lalit Bhati
2/4
further argued that accused/applicant has settled the matter with the
complainant and he has paid the amount the complainant. Hence, it is prayed
that accused/applicant be released on bail as he is ready to abide with any
condition imposed by the court.
1.1 Ld. Counsel has relied upon Sanjay Chandra Vs. CBI 2011 (4)
JCC 2913, Jitender Kumar Vs. State of NCT of Delhi 2016 (2) JCC 1022,
Dataram Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, State of Kerala Vs. Raneef (2011) 1
SCC 784, State of Rajasthan Vs. Balchand (1977) 4 SCC 308, Zahur Maida Vs.
CBI SCP Crl. No. 2123/2018, Sandeep Kumar Bafna Vs. State of Maharashtra
AIR 2014 SC 1745, Gurucharan Singh & Ors. Vs. State AIR 1978 SC 179,
Kashif Vs. State of Delhi bail Application No. 1453/2025, vikas Bharti Vs.
State of Govt. NCT of Delhi 2025 SCC OnLine Del 1595 and P. Chidambaram
Vs. CBI (2020) 13 SCC 337 to fortify his arguments.
ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF STATE
2. On the other hand, Ld. Addl. PP for the State has vehemently
opposed the bail application stating that complainant lodged a complaint on
NCRP Portal on 10.12.2025 which was later on converted into e-FIR No.
058/2026. During technical analysis and investigation of the financial
transaction, one suspicious bank account No. 50100786021112 IFSC Code
HDFC0007466 belongs to Gaurav Bhati was traced and in the said account
fraudulent amount of Rs. 30,196/- was transferred and the said account was a
Layer-I account of money trail. During investigation, Gaurav Bhati was traced
and during interrogation, he stated that said account belongs to him but the he
rarely uses the account and the said account was earlier used by his younger
brother namely Lalit Bhati.
2.1 Accused/applicant was interrogated and he disclosed about his
involvement as well as involvement of Vishal Sharma, who suggested him to
-- 2 of 4 --
FIR No. 58/2026
	PS Cyber New Delhi
	State Vs. Lalit Bhati
3/4
give his bank account details to earn easy money as Vishal Sharma was also
doing the same work with Munender for last one year. Thereafter, accused
Vishal Sharma also introduced Lalit Bhati to Munender. It is further submitted
that amount was transferred in the account of accused Lalit Bhati’s brother’s
account, who withdrew the cash and gave the same to Vishal Sharma in cash.
Then Lalit transferred the said USDT in to Manender’s Bianance Account and
received the commission.
2.2 It is further submitted that allegations against accused/applicant
are serious in nature and there is every likelihood that accused/applicant may
commit further offence, if released on bail.
ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF COMPLAINANT
3. Complainant submits that he has received the cheated amount and
he has no objection, if accused/applicant be released on bail.
4. Submissions heard. Record perused. I have also gone through the
case laws relied upon by Ld. Counsel for accused/applicant.
FINDINGS/CONCLUSION
5. Accused/applicant is in custody since 05.04.2026. Investigation
against him has already been completed and charge sheet has already been
filed. Accused has already repaid the cheated amount to complainant and
complainant has no objection, if bail is granted to accused/applicant. He is not
involved in any other case and trial shall take a considerable long time. He is
not at a flight risk and evidence is documentary in nature which is already
seized by the IO. Hence, I deem it appropriate to exercise discretion in favour
of accused/applicant and accordingly, accused/applicant Lalit Bhati is admitted
to bail subject to furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one
-- 3 of 4 --
FIR No. 58/2026
	PS Cyber New Delhi
	State Vs. Lalit Bhati
4/4
surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Ld. Trial court/Duty JMFC on
the following conditions:
i) That the applicant/accused will supply all numbers of his functioning
phones/mobile phones to the IO as well as about his whereabouts.
ii) That the applicant/accused shall not tamper with the evidence;
iii) That the applicant/accused shall not try to contact in any manner or threat
the prosecution witnesses;
iv) That in case of change of his residential address, he shall intimate the court
about the same;
v) That the applicant shall attend the Court on each and every date of hearing
without fail;
vi) that he shall not leave the country without permission of court;
vii) that he shall deposit his passport with the IO;
viii) In case of involvement in any criminal case during bail period the bail
shall be liable to be cancelled.
Nothing stated above herein shall tantamount of any expressions
on the merits of this case.
Pursuant to directions issued by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India
in SMWP (Criminal) No. 4/2021 titled as In Re Policy Strategy for Grant of
Bail as well as in compliance of judgment titled as Ajay Verma Vs. State, copy
of this order be sent to Jail Superintendent through e-mail.
Copy of this order be given dasti as prayed for.
(Dhirendra Rana)
Vacation Judge/
ASJ-07/PHC/New Delhi
12.06.2026
-- 4 of 4 --