Delhi High Court – Orders
Lokesh Yadav vs State Govt Of Nct Of Delhi on 25 August, 2025
Author: Sanjeev Narula
Bench: Sanjeev Narula
$~3
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ BAIL APPLN. 2583/2025
LOKESH YADAV .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. M.S. Arya, Mr. Pradeep Kumar,
Advocates
versus
STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Mukesh Kumar, APP for the
State with ASI Vinay Tyagi, PS ER-
1, Crime Branch, Delhi
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
ORDER
% 25.08.2025
1. The present application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 20231 (formerly Section 439 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 19732) seeks regular bail in proceedings arising from
FIR No. 226/2023 registered under Sections 489B, 489C and 34 of the
Indian Penal Code, 18603 at P.S. Crime Branch. Subsequently, a chargesheet
has also been filed in the said FIR against the Applicant under Sections
489A, 489B, 489C, 489D, 120B and 34 of the IPC.
2. Briefly, the case of the Prosecution against the Applicant is as
follows:
2.1. On 22nd September, 2023, secret information was received by ASI
1
“BNSS”
2
“Cr.P.C.”
BAIL APPLN. 2583/2025 Page 1 of 9
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/08/2025 at 22:19:42
Ajay Kumar at the office of ER-1, Crime Branch, that a person named
Shakoor Mohammad would be visiting near Akshardham Metro Station,
along with his accomplice, the Applicant, Lokesh Yadav, for delivery of
high-quality counterfeit Indian currency. On the basis of this information, a
police team was formed and a police constable, posing as a decoy customer,
was sent to the location with ₹5,000/- to strike a deal with them for supply
of counterfeit currency. When the accused persons arrived at the spot to
handover ₹10,000/- in counterfeit notes, they were immediately
apprehended and identified. Upon search, Fake Indian Currency Notes4
amounting to ₹5 Lakhs was recovered from Shakoor, whereas FICN
amounting to ₹1 Lakh was recovered from the Applicant. Accordingly, the
subject FIR was registered, and investigation was taken up. Both Shakoor
and the Applicant were arrested on 23rd September, 2023.
2.2 During interrogation, both the accused disclosed that one Himanshu
Jain gave them the total recovered ₹6 Lakhs with the instruction to exchange
the same in Delhi. Subsequently, on 23rd September, 2023, accused
Himanshu Jain was arrested near Jaipur Road, Ajmer Rajasthan and a
Maruti Swift car was seized from his possession, along with FICN of ₹1
Lakh.
2.3 During his interrogation, accused Himanshu Jain disclosed that FICN
of ₹7 Lakhs was actually given to him by Shakoor, after procuring it from
co-accused Shivlal. Thereafter, Himanshu gave ₹6 Lakhs to the Applicant
and co-accused Shakoor for exchanging it in Delhi and kept the remaining
₹1 Lakh with himself.
3
“IPC”
4
“FICN”
BAIL APPLN. 2583/2025 Page 2 of 9
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/08/2025 at 22:19:42
2.4 On the basis of the disclosure statements of co-accused Himanshu
Jain and Shakoor Mohammed, as well as the technical surveillance of their
mobile numbers, Shivlal and another co-accused Sanjay were arrested in
from the Jaipur Road, Ajmer, Rajasthan, while they were travelling in a
Hundai Creta Car. FICN of ₹1 Lakh was recovered from Shivlal, whereas
FICN of ₹50,000/- were recovered from Sanjay.
2.5 All arrested accused persons were then subjected to sustained
interrogation, wherein they were confronted with one another’s accounts.
Investigation revealed that the accused persons had set up a covert set-up for
printing and manufacturing of FICN in Ajmer, Rajasthan. It was further
discovered that while Shivlal, Shakoor and Sanjay were tasked with printing
and cutting the counterfeit, the Applicant and Himanshu were tasked with
exchanging the FICN with genuine currency. It was also found that Shakoor
used to give a fine touch to the fake currency with the help of chemicals and
ink.
2.6. The Call Details Records5 of all of the accused persons, including the
Applicant, revealed that they were in constant contact with one another, thus
establishing connivance. In fact, it was found that the mobile phone
recovered from the Applicant had 2 SIM cards, both of which were procured
by co-accused Himanshu Jain. While one SIM card was registered in his
name, the other was registered in the name of one Afsal Abdul Zaffar, albeit
with the registered address being that of the Applicant.
2.7 Pertinently, on 27th September, 2023, at the instance of Shivlal and
co-accused Shakoor, a raid was conducted at H. No. 1047, Ganesh Wadi,
Panchsheel Nagar, Ajmer, where huge quantities of FICN and other
BAIL APPLN. 2583/2025 Page 3 of 9
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/08/2025 at 22:19:42
incriminating materials were recovered and seized from the spot.
Particularly, FICN amounting to ₹1,28,500/- in the denomination of ₹500/-
notes, one sided uncut printed FICN sheets (808 in number) of ₹500/-
denomination amounting to ₹4,04,000/-, two sided printed uncut sheets (205
in number) of ₹500 denomination amounting to ₹4,10,000/-, Water mark
paper (111), laptop, colour printers, two pen-drives, ink and chemicals,
green thread roll, FICN waste paper cuttings were recovered. Further, some
documents including a bill of purchase for a lamination machine, ink and
other material, issued in the name of the Shivlal were also recovered from
the spot.
2.8 On the same day, FICN amounting to ₹1,29,500/-, one CPU, coloured
printer and other incremental material were recovered and seized at the
instance of Shakoor from his rented house located at H. No. 24, Swatantar
Janana Road, Ajmer, Rajasthan.
2.9 The owner of the house which was raided at the instance of Shivlal,
upon questioning, stated that he had given the house on rent to him and his
brother, Sanjay however, there is no rent agreement to this effect as the
brothers did not sign one.
2.10 All of the recovered FICN was sent to the Bank Note Press, Dewas,
M.P. for expert opinion, which confirmed that the recovered currency notes
were counterfeit. The seized digital and other materials were also sent to the
FSL, Rohini, which results are awaited.
2.11 During the course of investigation, it was discovered that Shivlal,
Shakoor, Sanjay and others were also arrested in relation to another FIR
bearing no. 745/2023 registered under Sections 489B, 489C, 120B and 34 of
5
“CDRs”
BAIL APPLN. 2583/2025 Page 4 of 9
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/08/2025 at 22:19:42
IPC at P.S. Beawar City, Beawar, Rajasthan wherein they used the same
modus operandi to circulate FICN.
2.12 After completion of the investigation, the chargesheet was submitted
before the Trial Court on 19th December, 2023 and the trial proceedings
have commenced.
2.13 The bail applications of co-accused Shivlal and Sakoor Mohmmad
have been dismissed by this Court, while co-accused Sanjay and Himanshu
Jain have been granted bail by this Court in the present case.
2.14 The bail application of the Applicant was previously dismissed as
withdrawn before this Court by order dated 28th August, 2024. Thereafter,
his bail application before the Trial Court was dismissed on merits by order
dated 24th February, 2025.
3. Counsel for the Applicant urges the following grounds for grant of
bail:
3.1 The Applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated this case.
The alleged recovery relied upon by the Prosecution was, in fact, planted by
the police, and no recovery was actually made from the Applicant.
Furthermore, there is no independent eyewitness to the alleged recovery, and
the entire case of the Prosecution rests solely on circumstantial evidence.
3.2 The Applicant is entitled to be granted bail on the principle of parity
with co-accused Sanjay, who was granted bail by this Court vide order dated
9th January, 2025 passed in Bail Appln. No. 3502/2024. Further, co-accused
Himanshu Jain was also released on regular bail by this Court on 20 th May,
2025 in Bail Appln. No. 854/2025. As per the order framing charges dated
2nd June, 2025, the Applicant has been charged along with co-accused
Himanshu Jain for the offences under Sections 489A/489B/489C/34/120B
BAIL APPLN. 2583/2025 Page 5 of 9
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/08/2025 at 22:19:42
of the IPC, while the other co-accused have been charged under Sections
489A/489B/489C/498D/34/120B of the IPC.
3.3 The Applicant has no previous convictions. He has been in custody
since 22nd September, 2023, investigation is complete, and chargesheet
stands filed. Pertinently, the charges in the present case have also been
framed recently, pursuant to orders passed by this Court. As such,
considering the number of witnesses, the trial in the case is likely to take
some time. In these circumstances, the Applicant’s continued incarceration
would amount to punitive detention at the pre-trial stage, thereby depriving
him of his personal liberty as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution
of India.
4. On the other hand, Mr. Mukesh Kumar, APP for the State, strongly
opposes the present bail application, on the following grounds:
4.1. The Applicant, in furtherance of a common intention with co-accused
Shakoor Mohammad, proceeded near Akshardham, Delhi, where he
negotiated the rate for counterfeit currency with a decoy customer. He was
also present at the location at the time of delivery of counterfeit currency in
exchange for ₹5,000/- in genuine currency from the said decoy customer.
His participation in the transaction forms an integral part of the execution of
the offence.
4.2. Additionally, counterfeit currency amounting to ₹1,00,000/- was
recovered from the possession of the Applicant. It is alleged that he, in
conspiracy and collusion with his co-accused, committed the grave offence
of circulating counterfeit currency with the intent to cause harm to the
Indian economy. Such conduct constitutes a serious offence under the
relevant provisions of law.
BAIL APPLN. 2583/2025 Page 6 of 9
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/08/2025 at 22:19:42
4.3. The CDR analysis of the mobile phones recovered from the Applicant
reveals that he was in constant communication with the other co-accused
since a long time, which clearly points to his active involvement in the case.
5. The Court has considered the aforenoted contentions urged by the
parties. Since the Applicant has placed reliance on the principle of parity
with co-accused Sanjay and Himanshu Jain, it becomes necessary to assess
whether their roles are comparable. While granting bail to the aforesaid co-
accused, this Court had noted that the investigation qua them was complete,
and the role ascribed to them was limited, absent any direct linkage to the
manufacturing process.
6. In the present case, on a perusal of the material on record, it emerges
that the role of the Applicant was also limited, similar to that of Himanshu
and Sanjay. The Prosecution has not been able to demonstrate prima facie
material to indicate that the Applicant was also involved in printing or
manufacturing of the counterfeit currency, unlike Shiv Lal and Shakoor
Mohammed. Moreover, the specific role ascribed to him is that of
facilitating the exchange of FICN with genuine currency. At the time of his
arrest, the Applicant was apprehended with FICN of ₹1 Lakh, but no other
incriminating material was found at his instance.
7. As per the Prosecution’s own case, the role attributed to the Applicant
and co-accused Himanshu Jain is similar, i.e., to facilitate the exchange of
FICN with genuine currency. Furthermore, as per the order dated 2nd June,
2025, both the Applicant and Himanshu Jain have been charged for similar
offences. Notably, the Applicant and Himanshu Jain have not been charged
under Section 489D of the IPC, which pertains to the offence of making or
possessing instruments or materials for forging or counterfeiting currency
BAIL APPLN. 2583/2025 Page 7 of 9
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/08/2025 at 22:19:42
notes or bank-notes. In view of these factors, the Applicant’s plea for parity
with co-accused Himanshu Jain merits due consideration.
8. Further the Prosecution’s case against the Applicant is based on the
CDR connectivity between him and all of the accused, which allegedly
shows that he was in regular contact with them over a period of time.
However, in the opinion of the Court, mere CDR connectivity with the co-
accused, without any other corroborating material demonstrating his active
involvement as a key member of the syndicate, cannot, at this stage become
a ground to deny him bail.
9. In view of the nature of the evidence, this Court finds that the
Applicant’s role is similar to that of co-accused Sanjay and Himanshu Jain.
It is further important to note that the Applicant has no prior antecedents
Therefore, the plea of parity is accepted.
10. As per the latest nominal roll on record, the Applicant has been in
custody as an under-trial for a period of 1 year, 10 months and 21 days as on
19th August, 2025, and the investigation qua him has concluded, charges
have been framed, and the trial has commenced. It is well settled that the
object of granting bail is neither punitive nor preventative. The primary aim
sought to be achieved by bail is to secure the attendance of the accused
person at the trial.6
11. The Applicant is, therefore, directed to be released on bail on
furnishing a personal bond for a sum of ₹25,000/- with one surety of the like
amount, subject to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Metropolitan
Magistrate/ Jail Superintendent, on the following conditions:
6
Sanjay Chandra v. CBI, (2012) 1 SCC 40; Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation,
(2022) 10 SCC 51.
BAIL APPLN. 2583/2025 Page 8 of 9
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/08/2025 at 22:19:42
a. The Applicant shall cooperate in any further investigation as and
when directed by the concerned IO;
b. The Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement,
threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case or
tamper with the evidence of the case, in any manner whatsoever;
c. The Applicant shall, under no circumstance, leave the country without
the permission of the Trial Court;
d. The Applicant shall appear before the Trial Court as and when
directed;
e. The Applicant shall provide the address where he would be residing
after his release and shall not change the address without informing the
concerned IO/ SHO;
f. The Applicant shall, upon his release, give his mobile number to the
concerned IO/SHO and shall keep his mobile phone switched on at all times.
12. In the event of there being any FIR/DD entry/complaint lodged
against the Applicant, it would be open to the State to seek redressal by
filing an application seeking cancellation of bail.
13. It is clarified that any observations made in the present order are for
the purpose of deciding the present bail application and should not influence
the outcome of the trial and should also not be taken as an expression of
opinion on the merits of the case.
14. The bail application is allowed and disposed of in the afore-mentioned
terms.
SANJEEV NARULA, J
AUGUST 25, 2025/nk
BAIL APPLN. 2583/2025 Page 9 of 9
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/08/2025 at 22:19:42
[ad_1]
Source link