$~73 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 2069/2026 ASHISH KUMAR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. A.K. Singh, Mr. Lalit Choudhary, Mr. Sandeep Bhardwaj, Ms. Shweta Sandilya, Mr. Deepak Kumar, Ms. Jutirani, Advs. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Amol Sinha (ASC Criminal for State) along with Mr. Kshitiz Garg, Mr. Ashvini Kumar, Mrs. Chavi Lazarus, Mr. Nitish Dhawan, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MADHU JAIN O R D E R % 17.07.2026 1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. 2. The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘BNSS’), seeking protection from arrest during the investigation pursuant to the notice issued under Section 35(3) of the BNSS dated 24.06.2026 in FIR No. 126/2026, registered at Police Station Special Cell, Delhi, for the offences punishable under Sections 152 and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘BNS’), Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959, Sections 4 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908, and Sections 14, 17 and 18 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a poor labourer, originally residing in the State of Bihar. It is submitted that the petitioner was initially employed in Kolkata and was thereafter sent by his 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 22/07/2026 at 12:57:14 employer to Dubai in the year 2023, pursuant to which he was issued a residence permit by the Government of the United Arab Emirates. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner has no connection whatsoever with the allegations made in the aforesaid FIR and is willing to join and cooperate with the investigation. 4. It is further submitted that, in view of the bar on grant of anticipatory bail under the provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, the petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court and seeks protection from arrest till the prosecution is able to establish the requisite mens rea against him. 5. Issue notice. 6. Notice is accepted by the learned ASC for the state, who submits that the mobile phone number of the petitioner was used for transferring money to the account of one of the co-accused, who has already been arrested in the present case. It is submitted that such transfers were not once, but were made on more than one occasion. He further submits that as many as nine bank accounts are linked with the petitioner’s mobile phone number. It is also submitted that explosive material allegedly manufactured in Pakistan, has been recovered from the arrested co-accused. Learned ASC submits that the money trail is yet to be fully established and that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary to investigate his financial transactions. According to the State, the conduct of the petitioner, particularly the repeated transfer of money from his mobile-linked accounts to the account of the co-accused, prima facie discloses the necessary mens rea warranting custodial interrogation. 7. This Court has heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. 8. The allegations in the present case pertain to offences punishable under 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 22/07/2026 at 12:57:14 Sections 152 and 61(2) of the BNS, Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959, Sections 4 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908, and Sections 14, 17 and 18 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. 9. Merely because the petitioner has placed on record his residence permit issued by the Government of the United Arab Emirates to contend that he was employed there as an office cleaner is no ground to raise the presumption that petitioner has no role to play in the present case. The submissions made on behalf of the State disclose prima facie material indicating repeated money transfers from the mobile number and account linked to the petitioner to one of the co-accused, besides the existence of nine accounts linked with the said mobile number. The financial trail is admittedly still under investigation and the State has specifically asserted that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary for an effective investigation. 10. In view of the nature and gravity of the allegations, the material placed before this Court, and the stage of the investigation, this Court is not inclined to exercise its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for granting protection from arrest to the petitioner. 11. Accordingly, the present petition, along with the pending application(s), if any, is dismissed. 12. The order be uploaded on the website forthwith. MADHU JAIN, J JULY 17, 2026/prg/P 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 22/07/2026 at 12:57:14