[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Delhi High Court
Mamta Devi vs State (Nct Of Delhi) on 11 February, 2026
$~1
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 11.02.2026
+ BAIL APPLN. 359/2025
MAMTA DEVI .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Harsh Vardhan Sharma and Mr.
Neeraj Kumar, Advocates
versus
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for State
with SI Deepak and Inspector Rakesh
Kumar
Mr. Sandeep Garg, Mr. Rabindra
Tiwary, Mr. Awanish Rai and Mr.
Anishka Bagla, Advocates for R-2
CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
J U D G M E N T (ORAL)
1. The accused/applicant seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR
No.213/2024 of PS Neb Sarai for offence under Section 406/420/34 IPC.
2. This is one of the old pending 179 bail matters assigned to this bench
after transfer from other benches. In the first call, none appeared but matter
was passed over in view of its old pendency. In this call, I have heard
learned counsel for accused/applicant and learned APP for the State assisted
by SI Deepak and Inspector Rakesh Kumar. After conclusion of arguments,
it was observed that Inspector Rakesh Kumar had signed the status report
BAIL APPLN. 359/2025 Page 1 of 4 pages
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
GIRISH 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4af
ec45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacc
a, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID -
7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d
15570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff
801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2026.02.11 17:40:43 -08'00'
Digitally Signed
By:NEETU N NAIR
Signing Date:11.02.2026
17:59:13
dated 02.05.2025 as SHO, Neb Sarai; but today, throughout the arguments
revolving around a false submission in the said status report, Inspector
Rakesh Kumar did not point out that he is the author of that report. Today,
IO has not come and is stated to be on leave, so the SHO/Inspector Paras
Nath has deputed Inspector Rakesh Kumar to appear before this Court.
3. The factual matrix, explained by Inspector Rakesh Kumar is as
follows. The accused/applicant was registered owner of the first floor of the
concerned premises and her husband was the owner of the second floor of
the same premises. Husband of the accused/applicant executed a General
Power of Attorney in favour of the accused/applicant pertaining to the
second floor. Thereafter, the accused/applicant executed sale deed of both
floors in favour of the complainant de facto along with roof rights. The
cheating alleged against the accused/applicant is that she falsely stated in the
sale deed that the subject property was free from all encumbrances, whereas
she had already mortgaged the first floor with IIFL Finance Home Limited.
Besides, the accused/applicant also gave an undertaking/NOC that the
subject property is free from encumbrances.
4. The admitted position is that there is pendency of cross civil suits
between the accused/applicant and the complainant de facto pertaining to the
above mentioned transaction.
5. In the above backdrop, the accused/applicant was granted interim
protection from arrest by the predecessor bench, which protection continued
on date to date basis and today is the first date before me. There is no
BAIL APPLN. 359/2025 Page 2 of 4 pages
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca,
ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638,
KATHPALIA
postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d1
5570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff80
1e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Digitally Signed Date: 2026.02.11 17:40:32 -08'00'
By:NEETU N NAIR
Signing Date:11.02.2026
17:59:13
allegation that the accused/applicant, while being under protection has not
joined investigation.
6. The most serious part of the allegation is that the accused/applicant
gave a forged letter of loan closure to the complainant de facto, stating that
she had paid back the entire loan amount. Keeping in mind the pendency of
cross civil suits, the alleged act of forgery of loan closure letter would
become significant while ascertaining criminality involved in the property
transaction. And that forgery would be a vital aspect in deciding whether the
accused/applicant deserves to be granted anticipatory bail.
7. But it would be shocking to note that on being called upon to show
that allegedly forged loan closure letter, Inspector Rakesh Kumar, who had
stated clearly in paragraph 3 of his status report dated 02.05.2025 about
existence of that letter, submits that there is no such letter. No explanation
has been advanced by Inspector Rakesh Kumar for making false averment in
paragraph 3 of his status report dated 02.05.2025, where he alleged forgery
by the accused/applicant. However, Inspector Rakesh Kumar submits that
the said status report was prepared by the IO/Inspector Pawan Kumar and
that he did not verify the contents before signing the same because these are
the allegations of the complainant de facto. But if that be so, it remains
unexplained as to why he did not state in the status report that although these
are the allegations of complainant de facto, no document was provided in
this regard.
8. Prima facie, the allegation of forgery does not appear to be truthful
BAIL APPLN. 359/2025 Page 3 of 4 pages
GIRISH
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec45
ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638,
KATHPALIA
postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d1557
0996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801e26fa,
cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Digitally Signed Date: 2026.02.11 17:40:19 -08'00'
By:NEETU N NAIR
Signing Date:11.02.2026
17:59:13
and as regards the alleged cheating, cross civil suits are already pending.
9. In these circumstances, I find no reason to deprive the lady
accused/applicant liberty.
10. The application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of her
arrest, the accused/applicant shall be released on bail, subject to her
furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety in the
like amount to the satisfaction of the IO/SHO concerned.
11. In view of contents of paragraph 7 herein, copy of this order be sent to
the concerned DCP for information and necessary action.
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
GIRISH 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4af
ec45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacc
a, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID -
KATHPALIA
7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d
15570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965f
f801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2026.02.11 17:40:02 -08'00'
GIRISH KATHPALIA
(JUDGE)
FEBRUARY 11, 2026
'rs'
BAIL APPLN. 359/2025 Page 4 of 4 pages
