[Cites 7, Cited by 0]
Delhi High Court
R. Usha @ G. Usha vs Central Bureau Investigation on 24 February, 2026
$~8
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 24.02.2026
+ BAIL APPLN. 5062/2025 & CRL.M.A. 38913/2025
R. USHA @ G. USHA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Rituraj Biswas, Mr. Murari
Kumar Singh and Mr. Aayush Garg,
Advocates.
versus
CENTRAL BUREAU INVESTIGATION .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Vikrant Pachnanda, SPP with Mr.
Mukul Katyal, Advocates.
CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
J U D G M E N T (ORAL)
1. The accused/applicant seeks regular bail in case RC No.
0031(A)/2012 DLI of Police Station CBI ACB, New Delhi for offence under
Section 120B/420/467/468/471 IPC read with Section 13(2)/13(1)(d) of
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
2. I have heard learned counsel for accused/applicant and learned SPP
for CBI. The IO/Inspector Davinder has not appeared even in this post-lunch
session. Learned SPP submits that the IO has gone to Rouse Avenue District
Courts. It seems that CBI is not seriously interested to oppose this bail
application.
BAIL APPLN. 5062/2025 Page 1 of 3 pages
GIRISH
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec455
69af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH
KATHPALIA
postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d1557
0996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801e26fa,
cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2026.02.24 18:14:42 -08'00'
Digitally Signed
By:NEETU N NAIR
Signing Date:24.02.2026
18:20:48
3. Broadly speaking, the allegation against the accused/applicant is that
she, along with few co-accused persons, fraudulently obtained grant to the
tune of more than Rs. 2 crore from government, which amount was
transferred in a bank account of the NGO run by the accused/applicant. The
case was registered by CBI in the year 2012 and all accused persons except
the accused/applicant have already been released on bail. The
accused/applicant is stated to have absconded and was arrested on
29.11.2025. In the meanwhile, entire prosecution evidence was concluded in
her absence as she was declared Proclaimed Offender.
4. Learned counsel for accused/applicant submits that out of 109
prosecution witnesses, only 76 have been examined and she is in judicial
custody since 29.11.2025 itself, as the IO did not require her presence for
investigation.
5. Learned SPP for CBI submits that they have only one ground to
oppose this bail application and that ground is the possibility of the
accused/applicant again fleeing the justice. It is submitted by learned SPP
that the accused/applicant had absconded and could be arrested only after 13
years of her being declared Proclaimed Offender. No other ground of
opposition has been raised.
6. As mentioned above, the case was registered in 2012 and all accused
persons except the present accused/applicant have already been released on
BAIL APPLN. 5062/2025 Page 2 of 3 pages
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca,
ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638,
KATHPALIA
postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15
570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801
Digitally Signed e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2026.02.24 18:14:32 -08'00'
By:NEETU N NAIR
Signing Date:24.02.2026
18:20:48
bail. The only ground on which the bail is opposed is that it took 13 years
for CBI to apprehend the accused/applicant. As submitted by learned
counsel for accused/applicant, her husband is employed with CRPF as
Inspector and it is not reasonable to apprehend that she would flee. The fact
that it took 13 years for a premier central investigating agency to even
apprehend a Proclaimed Offender speaks volumes about their interest or
lack thereof in arresting the accused/applicant. That also appears from the
fact that the IO has opted not to appear today to assist about the latest status,
because learned SPP expresses unawareness as to how many of the
remaining prosecution witnesses would deal with the role attributed to the
accused/applicant.
7. Considering the above circumstances, I do not find any reason to
deprive further liberty to the accused/applicant. Therefore, the bail
application is allowed and accused/applicant is directed to be released on
bail subject to her furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with
one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.
Accompanying application also stands disposed of.
8. A copy of this order be immediately transmitted to the concerned Jail
Superintendent for informing the accused/applicant. Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
GIRISH 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec
45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca,
ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638,
KATHPALIA
postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d1
5570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff80
1e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2026.02.24 18:14:18 -08'00'
GIRISH KATHPALIA
(JUDGE)
FEBRUARY 24, 2026/ry
BAIL APPLN. 5062/2025 Page 3 of 3 pages
