[Cites 9, Cited by 0]
Delhi High Court
Ajit Kumar Jena vs The State Of Nct Of Delhi on 11 March, 2026
Author: Swarana Kanta Sharma
Bench: Swarana Kanta Sharma
$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment reserved on: 06.02.2026
Judgment pronounced on: 11.03.2026
Judgment uploaded on: 13.03.2026
+ BAIL APPLN. 2805/2025, CRL.M.A. 33614/2025 &
CRL.M.A. 3080/2026
AJIT KUMAR JENA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Apoorv Kurup, Senior
Advocate with Mr Anuroop
Chakravarti, Mr Shreyash
Chaturvedi and Ms Nidhi
Mittal, Advocates.
versus
THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Manoj Pant, APP for the
State along with Inspector
Shikhar.
Ms. Meena Chaudhary
Sharma, Mr Akkash Bhadana,
Mr Saurabh Goel, Ms Roli
Mishra and Mr Vishal Chechi,
Advocates for complainant.
+ BAIL APPLN. 2913/2025
GOPAL CHATURVEDI .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Apoorv Kurup, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Danish
Aftab Chowdhury, Mr.
Shreyas Chaturvedi and Mohd.
Signature Not Verified BAIL APPLN. 2805/2025 & connected matters Page 1 of 21
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:13.03.2026
17:55:08
Sameer, Advocates.
versus
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Manoj Pant, APP for the
State along with Inspector
Shikhar.
Ms. Meena Chaudhary
Sharma, Mr. Akkash Bhadana,
Mr. Saurabh Goel, Ms. Roli
Mishra and Mr. Vishal Chechi,
Advocates for complainant.
+ BAIL APPLN. 4968/2025
RAMAKANT SHANKARMAL PILANI .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Amit Prasad, Mr. Tushar
Gupta, Ms. Neharika
Kushwah, Mr. Sumit Kr.
Mishra, Ms. Savita Sethi, Mr.
Lakhvinder Singh and Mr.
Raunak Pilani, Advocates.
versus
STATE NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Manoj Pant, APP for the
State along with Inspector
Shikhar.
Ms. Meena Chaudhary
Sharma, Mr. Akkash Bhadana,
Mr. Saurabh Goel, Ms. Roli
Mishra and Mr. Vishal Chechi,
Advocates for complainant
Signature Not Verified BAIL APPLN. 2805/2025 & connected matters Page 2 of 21
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:13.03.2026
17:55:08
CORAM:
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA
JUDGMENT
DR. SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J
1. By way of these applications, the applicants herein seek grant
of regular bail in case arising out of FIR bearing No. 86/2024,
registered at Police Station E.O.W., Mandir Marg, New Delhi, for the
commission of offence punishable under Sections 420/406/467/468/
471/120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 [hereafter 'IPC'].
Case of the Prosecution
2. Brief facts of the case, as emerging from the status report and
the material placed on record, are that the present FIR came to be
registered on the complaint of Sh. Ravi Pandey, Authorized
Representative of M/s Lok Sewak Leasing & Investment Pvt. Ltd.,
alleging commission of offences of cheating, forgery and criminal
conspiracy by M/s GBL Chemical Ltd., M/s Ganesh Benzoplast Ltd.
and their associates, including the present applicants. It was alleged
that in January 2024, representatives of the said companies had
approached the complainant company seeking a debt/equity
investment, projecting that their companies were reputed in the
market for manufacturing sodium benzoate and were experiencing
substantial business growth. It was represented that the companies
had earlier achieved a turnover of about ₹95 crores in the year 2018,
which had increased to about ₹212 crores, and that they were
targeting sales of ₹1,000 crores by the year 2026 with around 240
permanent employees on their rolls. It is alleged that accused
Ramakant Shankarmal Pilani had submitted a written request seeking
a loan of ₹7.03 crores on behalf of M/s GBL Chemical Ltd. The
complainant company was provided with several documents,
including board resolutions and other records relating to M/s GBL
Chemical Ltd. and M/s Ganesh Benzoplast Ltd. Being induced by the
representations made by the accused persons, the complainant
company had sanctioned a loan of ₹7.03 crores to M/s GBL
Chemical Ltd., subject to the condition that its holding company, i.e.
M/s Ganesh Benzoplast Ltd., would act as a co-borrower in the loan
transaction. The loan amount was thereafter disbursed into the SBI
current account maintained in the name of M/s GBL Chemical Ltd.
However, after receiving the loan amount, the borrower company
allegedly delayed repayment of the loan and despite follow-ups, only
two instalments were paid and thereafter no further repayment was
made.
3. During enquiry and investigation, two additional complaints
were also received from M/s IM Securities Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Capital
Trade Links Ltd., who alleged that they had similarly been induced
by the accused persons to sanction loans to the same entities. It was
alleged by M/s IM Securities Pvt. Ltd. that in February 2024, the
accused persons had approached them seeking disbursement of a
business loan of ₹7.03 crores and had submitted documents identical
to those furnished to the first complainant. Acting upon the
representations made by the accused persons, M/s IM Securities Pvt.
Ltd. disbursed the loan amount in March 2024; however, no
instalment towards repayment of the loan was ever paid thereafter.
Similarly, M/s Capital Trade Links Ltd. alleged that in February
2024, the accused persons had approached them seeking sanction of a
business loan of ₹6.35 crores and had submitted the same set of
documents that had been used in the earlier transactions. Initially, a
sum of ₹3.50 crores was transferred to the HDFC Bank account of
M/s GBL Chemical Ltd. However, it is alleged that thereafter
accused Ramakant Pilani requested that the disbursement be made
into another bank account of M/s GBL Chemical Ltd. maintained
with SBI. Consequently, a sum of ₹5.85 crores was transferred into
the said SBI account. It is stated that a sum of ₹3 crores was later
returned from another account, but the outstanding amount of ₹6.35
crores remained unpaid.
4. During the course of investigation, the bank statement and
KYC documents relating to the SBI account no. 41010899634 of M/s
GBL Chemical Ltd., maintained at SBI, Mumbai, were obtained. It
was revealed that the present applicants, namely Ramakant
Shankarmal Pilani, Gopal Chaturvedi and Ajit Kumar Jena, were the
controlling persons/authorized signatories of the said bank account.
Analysis of the bank account statements revealed that an amount of
₹7.03 crores was credited into the said account in January 2024 from
M/s Lok Sewak Leasing & Investment Pvt. Ltd., another amount of
₹7.03 crores was credited from M/s IM Securities Pvt. Ltd., and an
amount of ₹5.85 crores was credited from M/s Capital Trade Links
Ltd. Immediately after receiving these funds, substantial amounts
were transferred to the bank accounts of other entities including -
M/s Cardier Foods & Beverages Pvt. Ltd., M/s Yamuna Trade Link
and M/s Aggarwal Bulkactives Pvt. Ltd. Further analysis of the bank
account of M/s Cardier Foods & Beverages Pvt. Ltd. revealed that the
funds received from the account of M/s GBL Chemical Ltd. were
further transferred to several accounts, with major transfers being
made to M/s Aggarwal Bulkactives Pvt. Ltd., in which accused
Ramakant Pilani is stated to be a director. Thereafter, funds were also
transferred to the account of M/s Ganesh Benzoplast. Investigation
further revealed that the account of M/s Ganesh Benzoplast was that
of a proprietorship firm of Ramakant Pilani and that there had been
regular financial transactions between M/s Cardier Foods &
Beverages Pvt. Ltd., M/s Aggarwal Bulkactives Pvt. Ltd. and M/s
Ganesh Benzoplast since August 2022. It is also stated that applicants
Gopal Chaturvedi and Ajit Kumar Jena are directors of M/s Cardier
Foods & Beverages Pvt. Ltd.
5. During investigation, M/s Capital Trade Links Ltd. informed
the investigating agency that the email ID
[email protected], from which certain emails
regarding erroneous transfer of ₹3.50 crores had been sent, did not
belong to their company. They stated that their official email IDs
were [email protected] and [email protected]. Information
obtained from Google during investigation revealed that the email ID
[email protected] had been created on 09.03.2024, whereas the
genuine email IDs of the complainant company had been in use for a
much longer period. According to the prosecution, this indicated that
a fake or misleading email ID had been created and used by the
accused persons during the course of the transaction.
6. The applicant Ramakant Shankarmal Pilani was arrested on
29.01.2025. The applicants Gopal Chaturvedi and Ajit Kumar Jena
were arrested on 19.02.2025. During further investigation, the
personal bank account of accused Ajit Kumar Jena maintained with
Kotak Mahindra Bank was analysed and it was found that he had
received ₹2 lakhs from M/s Cardier Foods & Beverages Pvt. Ltd. on
05.02.2024. Further analysis of the bank account of M/s Cardier
Foods & Beverages Pvt. Ltd. also revealed transfer of ₹15 lakhs to
the bank account of Ajit Kumar Jena, though the detailed account
particulars relating to the said transaction were awaited from the
bank. Similarly, the bank account of accused Gopal Chaturvedi
maintained with Central Bank of India was analysed and it was
revealed that he had received several transfers of funds (about ₹13
lakhs) from M/s Cardier Foods & Beverages Pvt. Ltd., which
according to the prosecution was one of the entities through which
the alleged crime proceeds were routed.
7. It is alleged that the present applicants had criminally
conspired with each other and had opened the bank account in the
name of M/s GBL Chemical Ltd. on the basis of forged documents
for the purpose of receiving the loan amounts from the complainant
companies and diverting the same to various other entities. It is
further alleged that though applicants Ajit Kumar Jena and Gopal
Chaturvedi were shown as Head of Marketing and Accounts in M/s
GBL Chemical Ltd., in reality they never held any such posts nor
were they employed with the said company.
8. The status report also states that applicant Ajit Kumar Jena and
applicant Gopal Chaturvedi are involved in another FIR bearing No.
103/2024 registered at P.S. Cuffe Parade, Mumbai for offences under
Sections 420/465/467/468/471/34 of IPC. As regards applicant
Ramakant Shankarmal Pilani, the prosecution states that he is
involved in several other criminal cases registered in Mumbai,
Bengaluru and Delhi involving allegations of cheating and forgery
with a similar modus operandi, including FIR No. 28/2008 registered
at P.S. Kalachowki, Mumbai; FIR No. 103/2024 registered at P.S.
Cuffe Parade, Mumbai; FIR No. 179/2024 registered at P.S.
Marathahalli, Bengaluru; and FIR No. 60/2025 registered at P.S.
EOW, Delhi.
9. The charge sheet in the present case against the applicants
Ramakant Shankarmal Pilani, Ajit Kumar Jena and Gopal Chaturvedi
for offences punishable under Sections 420/406/467/468/471/120B of
IPC was filed before the Court of the learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, New Delhi, on 22.04.2025. The prosecution alleges that
the accused persons had, by using forged documents and
misrepresentation, induced multiple complainant companies to
disburse loans and had diverted the funds through various entities,
thereby causing wrongful loss to the complainant companies to the
tune of about ₹20 crores.
Submissions before the Court
10. The learned senior counsel appearing for applicants Ajit
Kumar Jena and Gopal Chaturvedi argued that both the applicants
have been falsely implicated in the present case and that they have
been in judicial custody since 19.02.2025. It was submitted that the
charge sheet already stands filed on 21.04.2025 and the investigation
qua the present applicants stands completed and their alleged role has
already been crystallised. It was argued that no supplementary charge
sheet has been filed for several months thereafter, which indicates
that no further investigation remains pending against them. It was
further argued that both applicants are, in fact, victims of identity
theft, allegedly orchestrated by one Manish Manoharlal Chaturvedi,
who is stated to be a history-sheeter and who had misused the
personal documents of the applicants to falsely implicate them in the
alleged transactions. In this regard, reliance was placed upon an order
dated 04.10.2024 passed by the learned Sessions Court at Mumbai in
FIR No. 103/2024 registered at P.S. Cuffe Parade, wherein
anticipatory bail had been granted and observations had been made to
the effect that the applicants appeared to be victims of identity theft.
The learned senior counsel further argued that the bank account of
M/s GBL Chemical Ltd. with SBI, which according to the
prosecution was used for receiving the funds, had allegedly been
opened using fabricated KYC documents of the applicants without
their knowledge. It was submitted that the applicants were not even
physically present in Mumbai at the time when the said account was
opened and that no video KYC had been conducted which could have
verified the identity of the persons involved. It was also argued that
the mobile numbers mentioned in the KYC documents were not of
the applicants and were allegedly linked to the said Manish
Chaturvedi. In this regard, reference was made to the statement of
one Sanjay Umasare, accountant of Manish Chaturvedi, recorded in
the investigation of the Mumbai case, who had allegedly stated that
Manish Chaturvedi exercised control over M/s Cardier Foods &
Beverages Pvt. Ltd. and had used proxy signatures and documents.
The learned senior counsel further submitted that a private forensic
signature examination report dated 28.07.2024 had opined that the
signatures attributed to the applicants Ajit and Gopal on certain
documents relating to the SBI bank account and KYC forms were not
genuine and were forged. It was argued that despite passage of
several months, the prosecution has not filed any forensic report of its
own to contradict the said findings. It was also argued that the present
FIR arises out of a complaint by the authorised representative of M/s
Lok Sewak Leasing & Investment Pvt. Ltd., alleging that the
company had been cheated of ₹7.03 crores. However, according to
the applicants, the same transaction is also the subject matter of FIR
No. 103/2024 registered at P.S. Cuffe Parade, Mumbai, where Rishi
Pilani, who is named in the present FIR, is the complainant. It was
argued that this creates serious doubts regarding the consistency of
the prosecution case. The learned senior counsel further contended
that the investigating agency has arbitrarily clubbed three separate
complaints, including those by M/s IM Securities Pvt. Ltd. and M/s
Capital Trade Links Ltd., in order to project the alleged fraud as
being of approximately ₹20 crores, despite no direct role being
attributed to the present applicants in the two additional complaints.
It was further submitted that the charge sheet does not show that the
applicants were authorised signatories or decision-makers in M/s
GBL Chemical Ltd. or M/s Ganesh Benzoplast Ltd. According to the
learned senior counsel, the applicants were neither employees nor
directors of the said companies and had no role in their management.
Reference was made to the annual report and balance sheet of M/s
GBL Chemical Ltd., which bears the signatures of Ramakant Pilani
and Ramesh Pilani. It was also argued that although the applicants
have been shown to be associated with M/s Yamuna Trade Links,
there is no material to show that they derived any benefit from the
alleged proceeds of crime. Qua applicant Ajit Kumar Jena, the
learned senior counsel further submitted that the allegation that a sum
of ₹15 lakhs had been transferred into his personal bank account is
incorrect and that the said amount was never credited to his actual
bank account. Qua applicant Gopal Chaturvedi, it was similarly
argued that there is no material to show that he had any control over
the companies involved in the alleged transactions or that he had
received any benefit from the alleged diversion of funds. On these
grounds, it was argued that the applicants be released on bail.
11. The learned senior counsel appearing for applicant Ramakant
Shankarmal Pilani submitted that the applicant has been falsely
implicated in the present case. It was argued that the applicant is
about 73 years of age, weak and frail, and suffering from several
ailments. It was contended that the applicant had voluntarily appeared
before the I.O. on 29.01.2025 and was thereafter arrested. According
to the learned senior counsel, the applicant had fully cooperated with
the investigation. It was further argued that the charge sheet has
already been filed on 22.04.2025 and cognizance has been taken on
01.07.2025. It was also submitted that though cognizance has been
taken several months ago, charges have not yet been framed and the
trial is likely to take considerable time. It was further pointed out that
the FSL report regarding the alleged signatures of the applicant on
the disputed documents is still awaited, which would have a bearing
on the trial. The learned senior counsel also submitted that the
applicant had himself lodged a complaint dated 08.04.2024, even
prior to the registration of the present FIR, inviting investigation into
the alleged transactions. It was argued that the alleged transactions
pertain to the period 2022-2024, whereas the applicant was arrested
in January 2025. During the intervening period, there is no allegation
that the applicant had tampered with evidence, influenced witnesses
or absconded. It was submitted that the case is based largely on
documentary evidence, which has already been seized by the
investigating agency. The learned senior counsel further submitted
that the applicant has resigned from the concerned company and no
longer has access to its records or operations. It was also argued that
the present FIR arises from the same set of transactions which were
earlier investigated in FIR registered at P.S. Cuffe Parade, Mumbai,
in which the applicant had cooperated with the investigation and had
been granted bail. It was further contended that although the
prosecution alleges that the applicant was the controlling person of
the SBI account into which the loan amounts were credited, the
charge sheet filed in the Mumbai case records that the mobile number
linked to the said account belonged to Manish Chaturvedi, who is
stated to be absconding. On these grounds, it was argued that the
applicant satisfies the triple test for grant of bail and that his
continued incarceration is not justified, and therefore, he be granted
regular bail.
12. The learned APP for the State, and the learned counsel
appearing for the complainant, opposed the present bail applications
and argued that the allegations against the applicants relate to a well-
planned economic offence involving cheating and diversion of funds
amounting to about ₹20 crores. It was submitted that the State has
filed a detailed status report on record setting out the role attributed to
each of the applicants.
13. Qua applicants Ajit Kumar Jena and Gopal Chaturvedi, the
learned APP submitted that both the applicants were authorised
signatories in the SBI bank account maintained in the name of M/s
GBL Chemical Ltd. with State Bank of India, Mumbai, into which
the loan amounts disbursed by all three complainant companies were
credited. It was contended that investigation has revealed that the said
funds were thereafter transferred to various other entities and
misappropriated. The learned APP further argued that both the
applicants are directors of M/s Cardier Foods & Beverages Pvt. Ltd.,
which is one of the entities to which the funds from the said account
were routed. It was also argued that the investigation has revealed
that both the applicants had received funds in their personal bank
accounts from M/s Cardier Foods & Beverages Pvt. Ltd., which
according to the prosecution forms part of the crime proceeds. Qua
applicant Ramakant Shankarmal Pilani, the learned APP submitted
that he is the main accused and was the controlling person of the
bank account maintained in the name of M/s GBL Chemical Ltd.
with SBI, Mumbai, through which the funds from the complainant
companies were received and subsequently diverted, and that
otherwise also, he is the Director of M/s GBL Chemical Ltd. It was
submitted that he was instrumental in preparing and providing forged
documents to the complainant companies for the purpose of obtaining
the loans and is also associated with beneficiary entities to which the
funds were transferred.
14. It was further submitted that the investigation is still underway
and the role of other stakeholders and beneficiaries involved in the
diversion of funds is yet to be ascertained. The learned APP also
submitted that the money trail of the crime proceeds is still under
investigation and no recovery of the cheated amount has been
effected so far due to the non-cooperation of the applicants. In view
of the gravity of the allegations and the role attributed to the
applicants, it was argued that the present bail applications deserve to
be rejected.
Analysis & Findings
15. At the outset, it may be noted that the allegations in the present
case relate to a financial fraud involving cheating, forgery and
criminal conspiracy whereby loans were allegedly obtained from
multiple complainant companies on the basis of forged documents
and misrepresentation. The investigation so far reveals that the
complainant companies were induced to disburse loan amounts by
projecting M/s GBL Chemical Ltd. and M/s Ganesh Benzoplast Ltd.
as financially sound entities. On the basis of such representations,
loan amounts, amounting to about ₹20 crores, were disbursed by
three complainant companies.
16. This Court notes that the material placed on record reveals that
the funds from the complainant companies were credited into a bank
account maintained in the name of M/s GBL Chemical Ltd. with
State Bank of India, Mumbai, and soon thereafter the said funds were
allegedly transferred to several other entities. The investigation
indicates that the said bank account was opened on the basis of
forged documents, including a purported board resolution of M/s
GBL Chemical Ltd. The directors of the said company, i.e. Rishi
Pilani, Ramesh Pilani and Rajivram Nagar, have disputed their
signatures on the account opening documents and have stated that no
such board resolution or meeting had ever been passed authorising
the opening of the said account. The investigation has further
revealed that the KYC documents used for opening the account were
also not genuine. The KYC form was shown to have been signed by
applicant Ajit Kumar Jena, however the directors of the company
have stated that they had not provided any such KYC documents for
opening the account. The bank account statements obtained during
investigation also reveal that immediately after receipt of funds from
the complainant companies, the amounts were transferred to accounts
of other entities including M/s Cardier Foods & Beverages Pvt. Ltd.,
M/s Yamuna Trade Links and other firms. The pictorial
representation of the analysis of bank accounts, as set out in the
Status Report, is extracted hereunder for reference:
17. This Court also notes that the Branch Manager of the State
Bank of India has also stated that applicant Ramakant Pilani along
with applicants Ajit Kumar Jena and Gopal Chaturvedi had
personally visited the branch for opening the bank account, which
was later used for receiving the loan amounts from the complainant
companies. The investigation thus far indicates that the bank account
in the name of M/s GBL Chemical Ltd. was allegedly used as the
primary account for receiving funds from the complainant
companies, which were thereafter diverted through multiple entities.
18. As regards the specific role of the applicants, the material
placed on record indicates that applicant Ajit Kumar Jena was shown
to be an authorised signatory of the SBI account maintained in the
name of M/s GBL Chemical Ltd., into which the funds from the
complainant companies were credited. The investigation also reveals
that the KYC documents used for opening the said account bear his
signatures, though the other directors of the company have disputed
having authorised such opening of the account.
19. The investigation has prima facie revealed that after receipt of
the loan amounts from the complainant companies, the funds were
transferred to various other entities including M/s Cardier Foods &
Beverages Pvt. Ltd., of which the applicants Ajit Kumar Jena and
Gopal Chaturvedi are stated to be the Directors. The prosecution has
further collected material which indicates that funds from M/s
Cardier Foods & Beverages Pvt. Ltd. were transferred to the personal
bank account of the applicant, including transactions of ₹2 lakhs on
05.02.2024 and ₹15 lakhs on 19.03.2024. At this stage, these
transactions prima facie indicate a financial nexus between the
applicant and the entities through which the alleged crime proceeds
were routed.
20. The investigation also attributes a similar role to applicant
Gopal Chaturvedi. The material on record indicates that he was also
an authorised signatory in the SBI account maintained in the name of
M/s GBL Chemical Ltd., which was allegedly used for receiving
funds from the complainant companies. The prosecution has also
collected material including the bank account statements of the
applicant which allegedly show receipt of funds, running into lakhs
of rupees, from M/s Cardier Foods & Beverages Pvt. Ltd.
21. The contention of the applicants Ajit and Gopal that they are
victims of identity theft and that their signatures on the relevant
documents are forged is sought to be supported by a privately
obtained forensic report. However, such a report has not been
examined during trial and cannot be conclusively relied upon at this
stage. The authenticity and evidentiary value of the said report would
have to be tested during trial. Further, the FSL report on the same
aspect is yet awaited.
22. Furthermore, the reliance placed by the applicants Ajit and
Gopal upon the order of the learned Sessions Court at Mumbai
granting anticipatory bail in another case cannot also be of any help
at this stage, as the present case involves different complainants and
the prosecution has placed additional material on record, including
bank statements and company records, which prima facie indicate
their association with the entities involved.
23. As regards applicant Ramakant Shankarmal Pilani, the material
placed on record indicates that he was the controlling person of the
bank account maintained in the name of M/s GBL Chemical Ltd. into
which the funds from the complainant companies were credited. He
was also the Director of M/s GBL Chemical Ltd., as well as
associated with other related entities i.e. M/s Agarwal Bulkactives
Pvt Ltd (Director) and M/s Ganesh Benzoplast Ltd (CEO). Allegedly,
the representations made to the complainant companies regarding the
financial position of the concerned entities by the applicant Ramakant
Shankarmal Pilani were allegedly false and misleading. The
prosecution also alleges that the bank account in question was opened
on the basis of forged board resolutions and documents and that the
applicant was instrumental in preparing and providing such
documents to the complainant companies and the bank.
24. Thus, the material collected during investigation prima facie
indicates that the alleged fraud involved multiple entities and
transactions through which funds obtained from the complainant
companies were diverted. The allegations pertain to serious economic
offences involving cheating, forgery and criminal conspiracy, and
relate to transactions amounting to about ₹20 crores.
25. Considering the nature of allegations and the role attributed to
the applicants, this Court is of the opinion that no ground for grant of
regular bail is made out at this stage, when further investigation is
stated to be pending, FSL report is yet to be received and charges are
yet to be framed.
26. Accordingly, the present bail applications are dismissed.
Pending applications also stand disposed of.
27. It is, however, clarified that the observations made in this
judgment are solely for deciding the present bail applications and
shall not tantamount to an expression of opinion on the merits of the
case.
28. The judgment be uploaded on the website forthwith.
DR. SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J
MARCH 11, 2026/ns
T.D.
