Delhi High Court – Orders
Dhankesh Yadav vs State (Nct Of Delhi) on 24 April, 2025
Author: Anup Jairam Bhambhani
Bench: Anup Jairam Bhambhani
$~3
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ BAIL APPLN. 3842/2024
DHANKESH YADAV .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Vivek Sood, Senior Advocate
with Rajiv Dewan, Advocate.
versus
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Nawal Kishore Jha, APP for State
with IO in person and Inspector
Deepak Kumar Yadav, PS Mayapuri
Mr. Siddharth Aggarwal, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Nishant Datta,
Advocate for complainant.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
ORDER
% 24.04.2025
[Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)]
1. The accused/applicant seeks regular bail in case FIR No.83/2023 of
PS Mayapuri for offence under Section 420/467/468/471/472/120B IPC. I
have heard learned Senior Counsel for the accused/applicant, learned APP
and learned Senior Counsel for complainant de facto.
2. Earlier, this application was heard by a coordinate bench on
11.12.2024 and the matter was adjourned to 17.03.2025 but on that day, the
matter could not reach till 05:25pm, so I adjourned the matter to this date.
Learned counsel for both sides submit that the matter need not be sent back
to the earlier bench since the Hon‟ble Judge holding the earlier bench is not
on Criminal Side now and it would be in the interest of expeditious disposal
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 24/04/2025 at 22:31:20
if this matter is heard by this court. For the sake of convenience, order dated
11.12.2024 of the predecessor bench is extracted below:
“After hearing Mr. K.K. Tiwari, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner; Ms. Shubhi Gupta, learned APP for the State; as well as
learned counsel appearing for the complainant, it transpires that the
petitioner is co-owner of a property bearing No.G-34 Green Park,
New Delhi, which he is alleged to have transferred to the complainant
by way of a forged sale deed. 2. It also transpires that the forgery
committed, including forging of stamp paper, which is the basis of the
allegation under section 467 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 („IPC‟).
3. Ms. Gupta has handed-up a copy of Status report dated 11.12.2024.
The same is taken on record.
4. Furthermore, learned APP points-out that the petitioner is also
implicated in another case bearing FIR No. 122/2023 registered
under 420/406/120B/174A IPC at P.S.: Safdarjung Enclave, Delhi, in
which he is alleged to have committed cheating and other offences in
relation to the same property that is subject matter of the present case.
5. Learned APP submits, that though some of the co-accused persons
have been admitted to bail, it is the petitioner who is the co-owner of
the subject property and has received money towards its sale, which
was based on forged documents. 6. Learned counsel for the
complainant submits that they have filed a petition seeking
cancellation of the bail of the co-accused persons, which is listed next
on 17.03.2025. 7. Learned APP further submits that the co-owner of
the subject property, one Ajit, is absconding and though charge-sheet
has been filed against the petitioner, the I.O. proposes to file a
supplementary charge-sheet against the co-accused once he is
apprehended. Ms. Gupta submits, that in the circumstances, further
consideration of the present bail petition be deferred till such time as
the co-accused Ajit is apprehended and charges have framed against
the petitioner. 8. In view of the above, this court is not persuaded to
enlarge the petitioner on regular bail at this stage. 9. In view of the
above, re-notify for further consideration on 17th March 2025.
ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J
DECEMBER 11, 2024/ss”
3. Broadly speaking, the allegation of the complainant de facto Mr.
Kuldeep is that he owns an immovable property situated in Lajwanti Garden
and agreed to exchange the same with an immovable property situated in
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 24/04/2025 at 22:31:20
Green Park owned by Mr. Dhankesh (the present accused/applicant) and
Mr. Ajit. The transaction was organized through property dealers namely
Mr. Gunveen and Mr. Jitin. It is further alleged by Mr. Kuldeep that he paid
total amount of more than Rs.2 crores to Mr. Dhankesh and Mr. Ajit through
the property dealers but was cheated in the sense that the title documents of
the Green Park property were found forged.
4. On the other hand, the accused/applicant denies the above transactions
and contends that neither any money was received by him nor did he forge
any document.
5. Today, learned Senior Counsel for the accused/applicant took me
through the FIR to point out that out of three tranches of the alleged
payments, not a single penny has been shown to have been received by the
accused/applicant, so there is no allegation of wrongful gain. As regards the
alleged forgery, it is contended by learned Senior Counsel that even
according to the complaint, the allegedly forged title deeds were given to
Mr. Kuldeep by the remaining accused persons and not by the present
accused/applicant.
6. On the other hand, learned Senior Counsel for complainant de facto
contends that there are specific allegations that the accused/applicant
participated in multiple meetings pertaining to the sale transaction of Green
Park property, so it is not believable that he would not have demanded his
share in the sale proceeds received by Mr. Ajit from Mr. Kuldeep. On this
issue, the IO has to unearth the money trail. Further, it is explained by
learned Senior Counsel for complainant de facto that the case involves two
sets of title deeds of Green Park property. One set of title deed in favour of
Mr. Dhankesh and Mr. Ajit was the one handed over to the complainant de
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 24/04/2025 at 22:31:20
facto while the other set is the one that was handed over to a third party
purchaser, who approached the Civil Court and disclosed that the Green
Park property had already been sold to him prior to the transactions between
the present parties started, which is cheating according to him. The set of
title deeds delivered to the third party purchaser was found to be a genuine
set of title deeds and accordingly, the set of title deeds handed over to the
complainant de facto was apparently the forged one and has been sent for
forensic analysis. According to learned Senior Counsel for complainant de
facto, if signatures of Mr. Dhankesh on the title deeds sent to FSL is found
genuine, it would show his complicity in forging the signatures of his
predecessor in interest.
7. Under these circumstances, learned Senior Counsel for the
accused/applicant on instructions seeks permission to withdraw this
application with liberty to file fresh application upon receipt of FSL Report.
8. Accordingly, the application is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as
sought. The IO is directed to ensure expeditious report from FSL by way of
priority letter to be issued by the concerned DCP ensuring that the FSL
Report is received as soon as possible but positively within four weeks. The
IO shall also investigate money trail in above terms and submit a Status
Report as and when fresh bail application is filed.
GIRISH KATHPALIA, J
APRIL 24, 2025/ry
Click here to check corrigendum, if any
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 24/04/2025 at 22:31:21
[ad_1]
Source link