Savinder vs State Of Delhi

$~P-2
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Reserved on: 22.05.2026
Pronounced on: 29.05.2026
Uploaded on: 29.05.2026
+ BAIL APPLN. 1192/2026
SAVINDER .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Shivam Batra, Mr. Ram Singh,
Mr. Abhishek Bhushan, Ms. Arpita
and Mr. Moh. Ibrahim, Advocates.
versus
STATE OF DELHI .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Yudhvir Singh Chauhan, APP.
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN
J U D G M E N T
1. By way of this application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 [“BNSS”], the applicant seeks regular
bail in connection with FIR No. 99/2025 dated 10.12.2025, registered at
Cyber Police Station, District Outer North, Delhi, under Sections
112/317(2)/317(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 [“BNS”].
2. I have heard Mr. Shivam Batra, learned counsel for the applicant,
and Mr. Yudhvir Singh Chauhan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor.
The prosecution has also placed on record a status report dated
13.04.2026.
3. Notice was issued in this application on 25.03.2026, and the
Investigating Officer was directed to inform the complainant regarding
the pendency of the present proceedings. Pursuant thereto, Mr. Chauhan
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PARUL
VASHIST
Signing Date:29.05.2026
18:55:49
BAIL APPLN. 1192/2026 Page 1 of 7

submitted that the victim has been duly informed in writing. However,
the victim has not entered appearance.
4. The prosecution case, as it emerges from the material on record, is
as follows:
a. Information was received indicating that several individuals
residing in low-income residential clusters in the areas of Bhawana
and Narela, Delhi, were involved in organized cyber-crimes, which
focused on opening, procuring, and operating mule bank accounts.
b. Pursuant to technical analysis and discreet verification of the
aforesaid information, a bank account [Kotak Mahindra Bank;
Account No. 8013348478] held in the name of one Sudhakar, was
found to be suspicious. Verification of this account revealed that it
was directly linked with four National Cyber-Crime Reporting
Portal [“NCRP”] complaints registered in Vellore, Madurai,
Koyambedu, and Cuddalore [Tamil Nadu]. Consequently, the
subject FIR was registered.
c. During investigation, notice under Section 35(3) BNSS was issued
to Sudhakar, who joined investigation, and disclosed that he
handed over his complete bank account kit, which included ATM
card, cheque book, passbook, and linked SIM, to his associates,
being Sanjeet @ Michael and the applicant herein, in lieu of
commission. In the chargesheet, the quantum of commission was
1
stated to be 2% per transaction . Sudhakar was thereafter bound
1
In the status report dated 13.04.2026, however, the quantum of commission is stated to be 3% per
transaction.
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PARUL
VASHIST
Signing Date:29.05.2026
18:55:49
BAIL APPLN. 1192/2026 Page 2 of 7

down in the case, with the direction to assist in the investigation, as
and when required.
d. At the instance of Sudhakar, a raid was conducted at the residence
of Sanjeet @ Michael, and he was apprehended on 11.12.2025. He
was served with a notice under Section 35(3) BNSS.
e. Upon interrogation of Sanjeet @ Michael, he disclosed his
involvement in operation of mule bank accounts, and that he was
working under the directions of the applicant herein. He stated that
he had handed over his and Sudhakar’s bank account kits to the
applicant. WhatsApp chats were also recovered from the mobile
phone of Sanjeet @ Michael with the applicant, which
corroborated the aforesaid.
f. Pursuant to the aforesaid disclosure, a raid was conducted on
12.12.2025, at the applicant’s residence [D-58, JJ Colony,
Wazirpur, Delhi], where he was found present. He was
apprehended and served with a notice under Section 35(3) BNSS.
g. The applicant thereafter voluntarily joined the investigation.
However, during interrogation, he did not cooperate and provided
evasive and contradictory statements.
h. During the raid at the applicant’s residence, several bank
instruments were recovered. The prosecution has provided a table
enumerating the recovery, and its link to the aforesaid NCRP
complaints, which is reproduced hereinbelow:
“ RECOVERY FROM THE PETITIONER SAVINDER:-
1) 13 SIM Cards
2) 36 debit cards
3) 33 cheque books
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PARUL
VASHIST
Signing Date:29.05.2026
18:55:49
BAIL APPLN. 1192/2026 Page 3 of 7

4) 9 passbooks
5) 2 POS machines
6) 1 rubber stamp
7) 2 mobile phones along with SIM cards
8) 5 filled-in cheques
The videography of recovery was also uploaded on e-Sakshya
application.
2
”
i. The applicant was arrested on 12.12.2025.
j. A chargesheet has been filed under Sections
112/317(2)/317(5)/3(5) BNS, and further investigation is
underway.
k. The statement of one victim from Tamil Nadu has been recorded,
and a supplementary chargesheet will be filed.
5. In support of the present application, Mr. Batra submitted that the
material in the present case does not disclose the commission of the
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PARUL
VASHIST
Signing Date:29.05.2026
18:55:49
BAIL APPLN. 1192/2026 Page 4 of 7

offences which the applicant is alleged to have committed. The offences –
except for Section 112 BNS – carry a maximum sentence of three years,
and Section 112 BNS also carries a maximum sentence of seven years.
The chargesheet having been filed, he contends that further custody of the
applicant is not required. According to Mr. Batra, the applicant has been
arrested only on the basis of the statement of a co-accused, which is
inadmissible in evidence. Mr. Batra challenged the alleged recovery from
the applicant, by pointing out contradictions in the seizure memo,
chargesheet, and status report with regard to the place of recovery and
seizure of the material.
6. Mr. Chauhan, on the other hand, submitted that the applicant is the
main conspirator, who is accused of controlling the procurement and
operation of mule accounts. The statement of Sanjeet @ Michael is
corroborated by the recovery of instruments relating to multiple bank
accounts from the applicant’s possession, which shows his involvement
in such financial offences. It is also alleged that the applicant was in
constant contact with co-accused Sanjeet @ Michael and Sudhakar, as
established by the Call Detail Records for the month of August 2025,
which is when the NCRP complaints were also made.
7. With regard to the argument that the alleged offences are not made
out on the basis of the material, Mr. Chauhan submitted that charges have
not yet been framed, and this aspect would have to be considered by the
Trial Court at the stage of framing of charges, for which purpose the
proceedings are fixed on 03.06.2026. Mr. Chauhan also supported the
allegation of conspiracy by showing that four debit cards, two cheque
2
Emphasis supplied.
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PARUL
VASHIST
Signing Date:29.05.2026
18:55:49
BAIL APPLN. 1192/2026 Page 5 of 7

books, and two bank passbooks recovered from the applicant, were in the
name of co-accused Sanjeet @ Michael. Out of these accounts, one of
them was found to be linked to two NCRP complaints, and another
account was linked to three such complaints. Another cheque book
recovered from the applicant, pertained to a bank account linked to 17
NCRP complaints. He further submitted that the recovered materials
pertained to accounts held in the names of several individuals.
8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I am not inclined to
release the applicant on bail at this stage. The FIR in the present case was
registered on the basis of information that certain unknown individuals
are operating accounts which are involved in criminal activity, and being
used as mule accounts. The conduct of online criminal activities, as
alleged by the prosecution, is undoubtedly serious and targets the most
vulnerable sections of society, including the elderly and unemployed
youth.
9. Although the applicant’s involvement was revealed as a result of
the statement of co-accused Sudhakar and Sanjeet @ Michael, the alleged
recovery from the applicant pursuant thereto, has been substantial. This
includes a very large number of banking instruments, relating to a number
of different individuals, including Sanjeet @ Michael. The alleged
recovery of as many as 13 SIM cards, 36 debit cards, 33 cheque books, 9
passbooks, and 2 POS machines, cannot be lightly brushed aside. The
prosecution has placed on record details of NCRP complaints relating to
several of the concerned bank accounts. The allegation of conspiracy is
also sought to be supported by recovery of banking documents relating to
accounts in the name of Sanjeet @ Michael.
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PARUL
VASHIST
Signing Date:29.05.2026
18:55:49
BAIL APPLN. 1192/2026 Page 6 of 7

10. While Mr. Batra sought to assail the integrity of the alleged
recovery, this was based on alleged inconsistencies in the prosecution
case – in the chargesheet, seizure memo, and the status report – as well as
on the argument that the charges are not prima facie established by the
material on record. I am not inclined to accept these arguments at this
stage, when the Trial Court is yet to consider arguments on charge. The
inconsistency between the timing of the alleged recovery and the
videography relied upon is also, at this stage, speculative.
11. The nature of the allegations in the present case, with the
disclosure statement of the co-accused having been corroborated by
substantial recoveries from the applicant, in my view, tilts the balance
against the applicant, in considering grant of bail, at this stage.
12. The bail application is, therefore, dismissed.
13. It is clarified that the observations made herein are solely for the
purpose of adjudication of the present bail application and shall not be
construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case, nor shall
they prejudice the rights and contentions of the parties at any stage of the
proceedings.
PRATEEK JALAN, J
MAY 29, 2026
tg/KA/
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PARUL
VASHIST
Signing Date:29.05.2026
18:55:49
BAIL APPLN. 1192/2026 Page 7 of 7