Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Delhi · body

2026 DAILYLAW 13795 (DEL)

HITESH DHAKOLIA v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

BAIL APPLN./2901/2026 · 2026-07-27

Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

$~77 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 2901/2026 HITESH DHAKOLIA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Shivam and Mr. Ashish Padam, Advocates. versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through: Ms. Shubhi Gupta, APP for State. SI Gautam. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV O R D E R % 27.07.2026 CRL.M.A. 21835/2026 (Exemption) 1. Exemptions allowed, subject to all just exceptions. 2. Application stands disposed of. BAIL APPLN. 2901/2026 3. The present application has been preferred under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking grant of anticipatory bail in connection with e-FIR No. 00064/2026 registered at Police Station Special Cell/IFSO, Delhi for offences punishable under Sections 308, 318(4), 319, 340 and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 4. The prosecution case pertains to an alleged cyber fraud, whereby, the complainant was induced by persons impersonating law enforcement This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/07/2026 at 14:21:12 officials to transfer an amount of approximately ₹2.08 crore into various bank accounts. During the course of investigation, the applicant is alleged to have played a key role in the operation and is stated to have received a part of the cheated amount through co-accused persons. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the applicant falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that he is not named in the FIR, no recovery has been effected from him and the prosecution seek to implicate him merely on the basis of disclosure statements of co-accused persons, hotel records and certain electronic chats, none of which, according to him, constitute legally admissible material warranting custodial interrogation. It is further submitted that the applicant is willing to cooperate with the investigation and that custodial interrogation is unnecessary. 6. Learned APP appearing for the State opposes the application. Keeping bearing in mind that two significant aspects, namely, firstly, that despite issuance of notices under Section 41A CrPC as well as Section 35 BNSS, the applicant did not join the investigation, and secondly, the allegations emerging during investigation that the applicant was at the helm of affairs and was managing the entire operation, this Court is not inclined to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction in favour of the applicant by granting the extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail. 7. The power to grant anticipatory bail is an extraordinary discretionary relief and is to be exercised sparingly. The considerations governing the grant of anticipatory bail are materially different from those applicable to regular bail. In Dilip Soni v. State (NCT of Delhi)1, the Delhi High Court reiterated that custodial interrogation is qualitatively more effective than This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/07/2026 at 14:21:12 questioning a suspect protected by an order of anticipatory bail and that grant of pre-arrest bail at the stage of investigation may impede a fair and effective investigation. The Court further observed that where the investigation is at a nascent stage, the Investigating Agency must be given adequate latitude to investigate the matter in the manner considered appropriate. 8. The applicant is directed to appear before the concerned Investigating Officer and cooperate with the investigation. 9. The Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to take him for personal interrogation or to release him on furnishing such surety as he may deem appropriate. 10. With the aforesaid observations, the bail application stands disposed of. PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J JULY 27, 2026 Aks/ss 1 24 SCC OnLine Del 3304 This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/07/2026 at 14:21:12