Dismissed¶22

Vikas Kumar Jain v. the State of ( NCT of Delhi)

Delhi HC21 Jul 2026BAIL APPLN./179/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail; Section 483 BNSS; FIR No.399/2013 PS Adarsh Nagar; Sections 392/394/397/307/411/427/120B/34 IPC; pistol-point robbery 13.12.2013; Rs. 18,00,000/- robbed; Rs. 1,00,000/- recovered on accused's instance; CDRs with co-accused; bail granted 2015; absconded from 2022; Proclaimed Offender August 2022; re-arrested 25.10.2025; changed address without informing IO/SHO/Court; not a first-time offender; FIR 419/2013 PS Karol Bagh Sections 420/406/467/468/471 IPC; prosecution evidence stage; bail dismissed; Vikas Kumar Jain; State (NCT of Delhi); Justice Saurabh Banerjee; Delhi High Court; 21.07.2026.

What did the court decide?

Taking a cumulative view of the facts and circumstances involved as also the apparent conduct of the applicant, the application seeking grant of regular bail is dismissed. ¶22

Vikas Kumar Jain Vs the State of ( NCT of Delhi) — Cheating and Forgery | Delhi HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 BNSS in the proceedings arising out of FIR No.399/2013 (PS Adarsh Nagar, Delhi) under Sections 392/394/397/307/411/427/120B/34 IPC. +2 more

¶11

Court's answer

Taking a cumulative view of the facts and circumstances involved as also the apparent conduct of the applicant, the application seeking grant of regular bail is dismissed.

¶22

Ratio / Principle

Despite being granted regular bail in 2015, the applicant failed to appear from 2022, having changed his address without informing the IO/SHO/Court, was declared a Proclaimed Offender in August 2022 and was re-arrested only after more than three years (on 25.10.2025); he never attempted to follow up the alleged compromise/settlement after securing bail. His conduct raises a serious apprehension of absconding if he is enlarged on bail.

¶17

Key takeaways

On merits, the applicant had knowledge of the complainant's whereabouts and work profile, fortified by CDRs inter se the applicant and the co-accused persons and by recovery of Rs. 1,00,000/- (a part of the robbed amount) from him.ratio¶21
The applicant is not a first-time offender, being involved in FIR No. 419/2013 under Sections 420/406/467/468/471 IPC at PS Karol Bagh, Delhi.ratio¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail application under Section 483 BNSS dismissed by the Delhi High Court (Saurabh Banerjee, J.). Applicant, arrested in FIR No.399/2013 (PS Adarsh Nagar, Sections 392/394/397/307/411/427/120B/34 IPC) arising from a 13.12.2013 pistol-point robbery of Rs. 18,00,000/-, had been granted regular bail in 2015 but absconded from 2022 after changing his address without informing the IO/SHO/Court, was declared a Proclaimed Offender in August 2022 and re-arrested only on 25.10.2025. His conduct raised a serious apprehension of absconding. On merits, CDRs with the co-accused and recovery of Rs. 1,00,000/- (part of the robbed amount) on his instance fortified his knowledge of the complainant's whereabouts/profile; he was also not a first-time offender (FIR 419/2013, PS Karol Bagh, Sections 420/406/467/468/471 IPC). Observations on merits are confined to the bail adjudication and do not affect the trial.

¶1

$~2

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- BAIL APPLN. 179/2026

¶4

VIKAS KUMAR JAIN .....Applicant

¶5

Through: Mr. Vishnu Sharma and Ms. Vanshika Sharma, Advs.

¶6

versus

¶7

THE STATE OF ( NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through: Mr. Satish Kumar, APP for State with Ms. Upasana Bakshi, Divya Bakshi, Ms. Divya Bakshi and Mr. Ashok Kumar Shukla, Advs. Mr. Manmeet Singh Maini, Adv. for Complainant.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE

¶10

O R D E R % 21.07.2026

¶11

By virtue of the present application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ( BNSS ), the applicant seeks grant of regular bail in the proceedings arising out of FIR No.399/2013 registered at PS.: Adarsh Nagar, Delhi under Sections 392/394/397/307/ 411/427/120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ( IPC ).

¶12

As per FIR, on 13.12.2013 one of the co-accused person, after shooting the complainant with a pistol, robbed his two bags, wherein one bag contained Rs. 18,00,000/-, PAN Card, ATM Card, Driving Licence, R/C, photographs and other documents and the other bag contained cheque book, foreign currency, Aadhar Card. Based thereon, the present

¶13

This is a digitally signed order.

¶14

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 24/07/2026 at 11:54:15

¶15

FIR was registered.

¶16

During investigation it was revealed that the applicant had all the information about the whereabouts and work profile of the complainant, and pursuant to further investigation, Rs. 1,00,000/- of the robbed money was recovered on his instance as also Call Detail Records ( CDRs ) inter se the co-accused persons were found. Thereafter, the applicant was arrested on 08.02.2014.

¶17

Interestingly, the applicant was granted bail in the present FIR, however, he, thereafter, failed to appear before the learned Trial Court and evaded the process of law, and thus, he was declared a Proclaimed Offender ( PO ) by the learned Trial Court sometime in August, 2022, where after he was re-arrested in the present FIR on 25.10.2025. 5. In the proceedings before the learned Trial Court, the matter is currently at the stage of prosecution evidence. 6. It is under these facts and circumstances; this Court has heard the learned counsel for the applicant as also the learned APP and learned counsel for the complainant. 7. As borne out, it cannot be controverted that even though the applicant was granted regular bail in the year 2015, he failed to appear since the year 2022, only to be declared a PO in August, 2022 and finally to be re-arrested after more than three years since then. This was all because he had changed his address without informing the IO/ SHO/ Court. It is not in dispute that the applicant is not a fly by night operator who is unaware of the factual matrix or the order granting him bail previously. Further, after securing bail he never attempted to follow up the alleged compromise/ settlement. This raises a serious apprehension on his

¶18

This is a digitally signed order.

¶19

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 24/07/2026 at 11:54:15

¶20

conduct and of absconding, if enlarged on bail.

¶21

On merits, facts reveal that the applicant had the knowledge of the whereabouts and the profile of the complainant which is fortified by the existence of CDRs inter se the applicant and the co-accused persons as also Rs. 1,00,000/-, a part of the robbed amount, was recovered from him. Also, the applicant is not a first-time offender as he is involved in an FIR bearing no. 419/2013, under Sections 420/406/467/468/471 of the IPC at PS.: Karol Bagh, Delhi.

¶22

Thus, taking a cumulative view of the facts and circumstances involved herein as also the apparent conduct of the applicant, the present application seeking grant of regular bail is hereby dismissed.

¶23

Needless to say, expression of view(s) on the merits, if any, are solely for the purposes of adjudication of the present application and shall have no bearing on the overall case/ trial involved.

¶24

SAURABH BANERJEE, J

¶25

JULY 21, 2026/Ab

¶26

This is a digitally signed order.

¶27

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 24/07/2026 at 11:54:15

Vikas Kumar Jain v. the State of ( NCT of Delhi)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikas Kumar Jain v. the State of ( NCT of Delhi)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prema Kumari Vs Central Bureau of Investigation

Anil Kumar Vs the State of NCT of Delhi

Shivam Kumar Singh Vs State of NCT Delhi

Pramod Singh & Ors. Vs the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Mohd Rashid Vs State of NCT of Delhi

Altaf Raza Vs State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.