Allowed

Jamaluddin v. the State NCT of Delhi

Delhi HC23 Feb 2026BAIL APPLN./4004/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the bail application by granting conditional pre-arrest bail to the petitioner following a verified settlement between the parties in a cheating case. The Court directed the petitioner to execute a bond with surety and comply with specific reporting and conduct conditions.

What did the court decide?

Pre-arrest bail granted subject to furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 40,000/- with one surety and compliance with reporting and conduct conditions.

Jamaluddin Vs the State NCT of Delhi — Cheating and Forgery | Delhi HC (2026)

¶1

$~3

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- BAIL APPLN. 4004/2025

¶4

JAMALUDDIN .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Salim Malik, Mr. Mohammad Akbar, Ms. Palak Bhagat, Mr. Shavana and Ms. Anjana Rani, Mr. D.M. Malik, Mr. Arman Malik and Ms. Rozy, Advocates.

¶6

versus

¶7

THE STATE NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Aashneet Singh, APP.

¶8

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN

¶9

O R D E R

¶10

% 23.02.2026

¶11

The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No. 0223/2025, dated 25.06.2025, registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, at Police Station Chandni Mahal, District Central, Delhi.

¶12

The FIR arises out of a complaint alleging cheating in respect of a transaction involving immovable property.

¶13

By order dated 10.02.2026, interim protection was granted to the petitioner in view of the following submissions:

¶14

“1. Mr. Salim Malik, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the dispute between the parties has been amicably settled by way of a Settlement Deed dated 05.02.2026, executed between the applicant and Narender Singh, at whose instance the FIR in question was registered. A copy of the said Settlement Deed has been handed up in Court and is taken on record. 2. Mr. Mohit

¶15

Page 1 of 3

¶16

BAIL APPLN. 4004/2025

¶17

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 24/02/2026 at 11:59:26

¶18

Baisla, learned counsel, whose appearance on behalf of the complainant was recorded on 27.11.2025, appears and confirms the factum of settlement. He submits that a sum of Rs. 20,00,000/has already been received by the complainant, and that a further sum of Rs. 20,00,000/- remains payable.

¶19

3. At this stage, it is noticed that Mr. Baisla has not yet filed his vakalatnama, and he is directed to file the same before the next date of hearing.

¶20

4. Mr. Baisla further clarifies that he is appearing both for Narender Singh and one Madan Lal, who are business partners. 5. In view of the aforesaid submissions, the Investigating Officer is directed to verify the Settlement Deed by recording the statements of Narender Singh and Madan Lal, if required, and to file a status report on or before 12.02.2026.

¶21

6. List on 13.02.2026.

¶22

7. In the interregnum, considering the prima facie material placed on record with regard to the settlement, it is directed that the applicant shall not be arrested in connection with FIR No. 223/2025, registered under Sections 420/467/468/471/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, at Police Station Chandni Mahal, till the next date of hearing.”

¶23

A Status Report dated 14.02.2026 has been handed over by the Investigating Officer [“IO”] and is taken on record. It is stated therein that the IO has recorded the statements of the complainant, Narender Singh, as well as Madan Lal, the business partner of the complainant. The complainant has stated that he has settled the matter with the petitioner and has received a sum of Rs. 20,00,000/- towards the first instalment of the settlement amount. The second instalment of Rs. 20,00,000/- is to be paid on or before 05.02.2027.

¶24

Mr. Salim Malik, learned counsel for the petitioner, also confirms the factum of settlement and states that the petitioner undertakes to remain bound by the terms thereof.

¶25

Although the complainant is not represented today, in view of the submissions made on his behalf on 10.02.2026 and the verification of the

¶26

Page 2 of 3

¶27

BAIL APPLN. 4004/2025

¶28

This is a digitally signed order.

¶29

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 24/02/2026 at 11:59:26

¶30

settlement by the IO, it is directed that in the event of arrest in connection with FIR No. 0223/2025, the petitioner shall be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 40,000/- with one surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the IO/Duty Magistrate, and subject to the following conditions:

¶31

a. The petitioner will report to the IO on each and every occasion, as required by the IO.

¶32

b. The petitioner will furnish his mobile number to the IO, and shall keep the said mobile phone running and always switched on. The mobile number shall not be changed or switched off without prior intimation to the IO.

¶33

c. The petitioner will give his residential address to the IO, and will not change his residential address without prior intimation to the IO.

¶34

d. The petitioner shall not commit any offence during pendency of these proceedings.

¶35

The petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶36

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.

¶37

PRATEEK JALAN, J

¶38

FEBRUARY 23, 2026

¶39

Sh/JM/

¶40

Page 3 of 3

¶41

BAIL APPLN. 4004/2025

¶42

Jamaluddin v. the State NCT of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jamaluddin v. the State NCT of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Jyoti Vs the State of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Akshay Maharana Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi

Gaurav Chugh & Ors. Vs the State Government of NCT of Delhi through SHO Ps Tilak Nagar & Anr.

Saif Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Mariyum ( in Jc) Vs State (Nct of Delhi)

Tushar Goel Vs State NCT of Delhi