CRL.M.C./423/2025 of RUPALI RASTOGI Vs STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR.

$~8 to 10

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+CRL.M.C. 423/2025, CRL.M.A. 2055/2025RUPALI RASTOGI.....PetitionerRUPALI RASTOGI.....Petitioner

.....PetitionerThrough:Mr. Yashvir Singh Kadian, Mr.Ashwani Kumar, Mr. JahangirAhmed, Advs.Ashwani Kumar, Mr. JahangirAhmed, Advs.

versus

STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR. .....Respondents

Through:Mr. Aashneet Singh, APP with SIManoj Kumar, PS JanakpuriMr. Kunal Manav, Mr. AnupamBhati, Advs.

+CRL.M.C. 424/2025, CRL.M.A. 2064/2025

KANTA.....Petitioner

Through:Mr. Yashvir Singh Kadian, Mr.Ashwani Kumar, Mr. JahangirAhmed, Advs.Ashwani Kumar, Mr. JahangirAhmed, Advs.

versus

STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR.....RespondentsThrough:Mr. Aashneet Singh, APP with SIManoj Kumar, PS JanakpuriMr. Kunal Manav, Mr. AnupamBhati, Advs.

+CRL.M.C. 458/2025, CRL.M.A. 2183/2025, CRL.M.A. 2184/2025

VIBHA KUSHWAHA

.....Petitioner

Through:Mr. Yashvir Singh Kadian, Mr.Ashwani Kumar, Mr. JahangirAhmed, Advs.Ashwani Kumar, Mr. JahangirAhmed, Advs.

versus

STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR. .....RespondentsThrough:Mr. Aashneet Singh, APP with SIManoj Kumar, PS JanakpuriMr. Kunal Manav, Mr. AnupamBhati, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH

O R R%14.02.2025

1.Thesearepetitionsseekingcancellationoftheordersdated20.12.2024 passed in BAIL APPL. 794/2024, BAIL APPL. 793/2024, BAILAPPL. 790/2024 wherein the respondent No. 2 was granted bail.2.The operational portion of the orders dated 20.12.2024 reads as under:“5.As per the status report, there are 5 FIRs pending against thepetitioner. The details of the same are as under:

6. It is stated that the total amount taken by the petitioner from thecomplainants is to the tune of Rs 70 lakhs and out of the saidamount, an amount of Rs 14.2 lakhs has already been repaid.Another sum of Rs. 20 lakhs is lying deposited with the RegistrarGeneral, Delhi High Court in terms of order dated 22.11.2024.7. The petitioner is in custody since 02.10.2020.

8. Mr. Manav, learned counsel for the petitioner states that thepetitioner immediately, on being, released on bail will give aschedule to the concerned Investigating Officer (IO) indicatingthat the entire remaining amount payable to the complainantsalong with appropriate interest would be deposited with theRegistrar General, Delhi High Court in equal monthly instalmentsstarting from the month of March 2025.

9. The said schedule shall be given to the IO immediately within 1week of release from the jail and it is directed that the same will bescrupulously followed by the petitioner.

10.The statement of the learned counsel for the petitioner is takenon record and the petitioner is bound by the same.

11.In the present case, the charge sheet has already been filed and

the other co-accused persons have been enlarged on bail. Eventhough the petitioner had earlier jumped bail, the same can beaddressed by imposing stricter conditions on the petitioner. Bail isthe rule and jail is an exception. The petition is still under trial

prisoner and the trial in the FIR will take substantial time.

12.Hence, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner isdirected to be released on bail subject to the following terms andconditions:

3.A perusal of the petitions show that respondent No. 2 concealed anMoU dated 27.01.2021, wherein clauses 1 and 4 read as under:

“1. That the FIFTH PARTY shall repay to the FIRST PARTY toFOURTH PARTY their respective paid amounts, alongwith aninterest of 6.5% p.a. calculated from the respective dates ofpayments, in two installments as described in Annexures to Drespectively.

4. That in case the FIFTH PARTY fails to pay the amount as per theANNEXURES to to the respective parties, then the FIFTHPARTY shall pay to the FIRST PARTY to FOURTH PARTY theirrespective paid amounts alongwith an interest @ 12% p.a. (insteadof 6.5% p.a.) to be calculated from the respective dates of paymentstill realization. In the case of any default the FIRST PARTY toFOURTH PARTY can recover their respective amounts alongwithan interest of 12% p.a. to be calculated from the respective dates ofpayments till realization from the said property kept in security.”

4.The said MoU was not filed with the earlier bail applications whereinthe ‘FIFTH PARTY’ is respondent No. 2.

5.A perusal of the said MoU shows that respondent No. 2 had alreadyagreed to return the money on 27.01.2021.

6.Respondent No. 2 was to pay an interest of 6.5% to the petitioner andin case of default at the rate of 12%. Admittedly, the scheduled was notadhered to.

7.Other important orders of 31.07.2021 passed in the FIR Nos.457/2017, 458/2017, 456/2017, were also concealed in BAIL APPL.794/2024, BAIL APPL. 793/2024, BAIL APPL. 790/2024 wherein para 6onwards read as under:

“6. On the several previous dates of hearing, the applicant/accusedhad sought time for payment of the entire remaining cheatedamount. He was granted time on several dates of hearing. However,despite passage of more than seven months, he has faltered in hiscommitment and today again, he has come up with lame excusefor non return of the cheated amount. It appears that theapplicant/accused has deliberately made mockery of the criminaljustice system by giving false assurances in the court on manyoccasions about his commitment to repay the cheated amount.

7. In the present application, the applicant/accused has soughtinterim bail for 20 days only and that too on the ground of medicalcondition of his wife. Pertinently, the present application was notfiled on the merits of the case. The applicant/accused has alreadyavailed the relief sought in the present application. Rather, onaccount of his dishonest assurances of return of the cheatedamount, he has taken court on ride on several occasions toovershoot and enjoy more than the sought relief by gettingextension of his interim bail for more than seven months.

8. The applicant/accused is stated to be involved in four other

similarcasesofcheating.Inthesaidcasesalso,theapplicant/accused cheated several persons by adopting similarmodus operendi for cheating them for total sum of more thanRs.60 lacs. In the present case, the applicant has cheated hapless,gullible and vulnerable plot/land seekers and caused wrongful lossto them which run into lacs of rupees.

9. In view of the above facts and circumstances, no ground is madeout for further extending the interim bail of the applicant/accused.Hence, the present application is disposed off with the directions tothe applicant/accused to surrender before the concerned Ld. MMon 02.08.2021. It is hereby clarified at the cost of the repetition thatthe present application was neither filed on the merits of the casenor it has been disposed off on merits.

10. The observations made while disposing off the presentapplication shall not tantamount to the expressions on the merits ofthe case.

11. At request, copy of this order be sent to Ld. Counsel for theapplicant/accused, Ld. Counsels for the complainant/victims and IOon their respective e-mail IDs.”

8.On 20.12.2024, this Court was misled into the fact that the amount ofRs. 70 lakhs was taken in 5 FIRs and an amount of Rs. 14.2 lakhs had beenrepaid and Rs. 20 lakhs has been deposited with the Registrar General.

9.What was not disclosed to the Court was that as per the MoU, theseamounts were to carry interest at the rate of 12% per annum and hence theamounts to be returned in the 5 FIRs would not be to the tune of Rs. 70lakhs but would almost be double.

10.The fact that respondent No. 2 had already agreed to pay interest atthe rate of 12% was not disclosed. Had it been disclosed, the Court, perhapswould not have granted bail to the petitioner.

11.The fact that respondent No. 2 has concealed the MoU as well as theorders dated 31.07.2021 shows that the respondent No. 2 approached thisCourt with unclean hands and concealed material documents and ordersfrom this Court.

12.For the said reasons, the petitions are allowed and the orders dated20.12.2024 passed in BAIL APPL. 794/2024, BAIL APPL. 793/2024, BAILAPPL. 790/2024 are recalled and the bail granted stands cancelled.

13.The reply is taken on record.14.As and when the petitioner is at liberty to file fresh bail applicationwhich will be considered in accordance with law.

JASMEET SINGH, J

FEBRUARY 14, 2025/DM

Click here to check corrigendum, if any