PRIYANSHI SHARMA vs STATE THROUGH PS JANAKPURI

Judgment text excerpt

$~59 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 20.05.2026 + BAIL APPLN. 1990/2026 & CRL.M.A. 16326/2026 PRIYANSHI SHARMA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Shahid Ali, Mr. Shahrukh Khan, Mohd. Salman, Mr. Nazar Husssain and Mr. Ahmad Saeed, Advocates versus STATE THROUGH PS JANAKPURI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Hemant Mehla, APP for State with SI Deepak Patwal CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The accused/applicant seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 191/2023 of Police Station Janakpuri for offence under Section 420 IPC. 2. Broadly speaking, the allegation against the accused/applicant is as follows. Mr. Daksh Sharma (husband of the accused/applicant), employed with the complainant de facto, purchased one second hand Mercedes Benz car from complainant de facto for a sum of Rs. 41,00,000/-. Mr. Daksh BAIL APPLN. 1990/2026 Page 1 of 4 pages GIRISH Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI, 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec45569af3962c6fb 4835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - KATHPALIA 7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi, serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570996b40f80cb d2eee60402c487965ff801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA Date: 2026.05.20 05:15:35 +05'30' Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:RAHUL YADAV Signing Date:20.05.2026 17:20:07 Sharma represented his wife, the present accused/applicant as purchaser. Thereafter, the said car was taken by the co-accused Vinod Paswan to Hathras. According to the complainant de facto, the said car is in possession of the present accused/applicant and cost of the same has not been paid to him. It is also alleged by prosecution that the said car was neither returned nor its cost was paid despite directions of this Court. 3. On behalf of accused/applican