Avtar Singh @ Happy vs State Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr.

$~55
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 28.10.2026
# CNR No. DLHC010514742026
+ BAIL APPLN. 4556/2026, CRL.M.A. 33591/2026, 33590/2026 &
33589/2026

AVTAR SINGH @ HAPPY .....Petitioner
Through: Counsel for accused/applicant
( appearance not given ).

versus


STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for State
with Investigating Officer/SI Madan
Lal.







CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA


J U D G M E N T (ORAL)

1. The accused/applicant seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No.
178/2026 of PS IGI Airport for offence under Section
318(4)/336(3)/340(2)/61(2) of BNS and Section 12 of the Passports Act.

2. Broadly speaking, allegation against the accused/applicant is that he

CRL.M.C. 4556/2026 Page 1 of 4 pages

Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec45569
af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH
COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638,
postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d1557099
6b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801e26fa,
cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2026.10.28 17:26:43 +05'30'
GIRISH
KATHPALIA
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RAHUL YADAV
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:28:08

provided forged Canadian Visa to a passenger namely Bhinderjit Singh, who
was intercepted by airport authorities while trying to travel on that forged
Visa. At that time, Bhinderjit Singh was trying to travel to Colombo from
where he intended to travel to Canada on the forged Visa. According to
prosecution, the said Visa was found forged on being checked from the
concerned Embassy. Further, according to prosecution, the
accused/applicant is involved in three more cases of similar nature registered
in Punjab.

3. At the outset, learned APP for State assisted by Investigating
Officer/SI Madan Lal points out that despite specific opportunity granted on
last date, the accused/applicant has again concealed the fate of his earlier
anticipatory bail applications.

4. It appears that on 16.10.2026, the earlier anticipatory bail application
no. 4480/2026 filed by the accused/applicant was allowed to be withdrawn
with liberty to file afresh after disclosing the orders passed in previous
anticipatory bail applications. The said anticipatory bail application
no.4480/2026 was the second anticipatory bail application, the first one
being bail application no.4044/2026, which also had been withdrawn for
same reason. The present anticipatory bail application is the third application
filed in this court, but again suffers the same vice of concealment. The order
dated 16.10.2026 whereby the second anticipatory bail application was
allowed to be withdrawn has not been filed with this anticipatory bail

CRL.M.C. 4556/2026 Page 2 of 4 pages

Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec455
69af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH
COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638,
postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570
996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801e26fa,
cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2026.10.28 17:26:34 +05'30'
GIRISH
KATHPALIA
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RAHUL YADAV
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:28:08

application despite the fact that the withdrawal of second application was
allowed so that orders passed on all bail applications could be placed before
the court.

5. More serious than the above is that the affidavit ( at page 20 of
paperbook ) filed in compliance with the directions of the Supreme Court in
the case of Zeba Khan vs State of U.P. & Ors., 2026 INSC 144 appears to
have been forged. That is so, because signatures of the deponent at the end
of body of the affidavit are completely distinct from the signatures at the end
of verification of the affidavit. Not just this, the affidavit mentions the
second anticipatory bail application no.4480/2026 dismissed as withdrawn,
which dismissal was by order dated 16.10.2026, but the said affidavit is
dated 03.10.2026 and notarized on 03.10.2026 itself. It is not possible that
an affidavit sworn on 03.10.2026 would mention the dismissal dated
16.10.2026. In fact, as mentioned above, even the signatures on the page
where body of the affidavit ends are different from signatures on the page
where verification is recorded. Not just that, even the vakalatnama on the
basis whereof the present anticipatory bail application was filed is dated
30.09.2026, whereas the earlier anticipatory bail application was dismissed
on 16.10.2026. It means that same vakalatnama which was filed with earlier
anticipatory bail application has been filed with this application as well. It
appears that the accused/applicant is not even aware that the earlier
anticipatory bail application was withdrawn and the same has been again
filed.

CRL.M.C. 4556/2026 Page 3 of 4 pages

Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afe
c45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca,
ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638,
postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d1
5570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff8
01e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2026.10.28 17:26:24 +05'30'
Digitally Signed
By:RAHUL YADAV
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:28:08
GIRISH
KATHPALIA
Signature Not Verified

6. Considering the above circumstances, I do not find it a fit case to
grant anticipatory bail to the accused/applicant. Therefore, the anticipatory
bail application and accompanying applications are dismissed.



Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,
2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec
45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca,
ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638,
postalCode=110003, st=Delhi,
serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15
570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801e
26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA
Date: 2026.10.28 17:26:11 +05'30'
GIRISH
KATHPALIA
GIRISH KATHPALIA
(JUDGE)
OCTOBER 28, 2026/ ry


CRL.M.C. 4556/2026 Page 4 of 4 pages

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RAHUL YADAV
Signing Date:28.10.2026
17:28:08