Allowed¶31

Aslam v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Delhi HC16 Feb 2026BAIL APPLN./4496/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail allowed; forged documents; transfer of electricity connection; TPDDL; OTP; technical logs not collected; English signatures absent, applicant signs in Urdu; Sections 420/468/471 IPC; FIR No. 614/2024 PS Wazirabad; tenant; Shajika Babu; Yatindra Nirvik; Naresh Kumar; compromise/settlement between parties; sale deed executed; personal bond Rs. 10,000/- with one surety; join investigation as directed by IO; High Court of Delhi; Justice Girish Kathpalia; BAIL APPLN. 4496/2024.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted: in the event of arrest, the accused/applicant to be released on bail subject to furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the IO/SHO concerned, and to join investigation as and when directed in writing by the IO. ¶31

Aslam Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi — Cheating and Forgery | Delhi HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶31

Issue for consideration

Whether the accused/applicant Aslam is entitled to anticipatory bail in FIR No. 614/2024, PS Wazirabad, for offences under Sections 420/468/471 IPC. +1 more

¶11

Ratio / Principle

Since no technical logs from TPDDL reflecting receipt of the transfer request from the applicant's mobile phone, no record of OTP generation, and no document bearing the applicant's English signatures were collected during investigation, the court finds no reason to deprive the accused/applicant of liberty.

¶30

Key takeaways

Endorsing the APP's submission ('and rightly so'), the court accepted that settlement between the private parties does not absolve the accused of liability for obtaining transfer of the electricity connection on forged documents; stated in passing and not the basis of the disposition.obiter¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail granted (High Court of Delhi, Girish Kathpalia J) in BAIL APPLN. 4496/2024, Aslam v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi, arising from FIR No. 614/2024, PS Wazirabad, under Sections 420/468/471 IPC, alleging that the applicant-tenant obtained transfer of the electricity connection in his name from TPDDL on forged documents of transfer of the tenanted property. The IO reported that no TPDDL technical logs, no OTP-generation record, and no document bearing the applicant's English signatures (he signs in Urdu) had been collected. While noting that settlement between private parties does not itself absolve liability for the alleged forgery, the court held there was no reason to deprive the applicant of liberty and allowed the application: release on arrest subject to a personal bond of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety in the like amount, and a direction to join investigation as and when directed in writing by the IO.

¶1

$~5

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of Decision: 16.02.2026

¶4

+ BAIL APPLN. 4496/2024

¶5

ASLAM .....Petitioner

¶6

Through: Mr. Mohammad Faraz, Advocate ( through videoconferencing ).

¶7

versus

¶8

STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for State ( through videoconferencing ) with SI Heera Lal, PS Wazirabad.

¶9

CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

¶10

J U D G M E N T (ORAL)

¶11

The accused/applicant seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 614/2024 of PS Wazirabad for offence under Section 420/468/471 IPC.

¶12

I have heard learned counsel for accused/applicant and learned APP for State assisted by IO/SI Heera Lal.

¶13

Broadly speaking, prosecution case flowing out of the FIR is that the accused/applicant, being tenant in the subject property obtained transfer of electricity connection in his name on the basis of forged documents of transfer of that property. The property was originally owned by one Shajika Babu, in whose name the electricity connection was installed. Shajika Babu

¶14

BAIL APPLN. 4496/2024 Page 1 of 3 pages

¶15

Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI, 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4af GIRISH KATHPALIA ec45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi, serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff 801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA Date: 2026.02.16 14:26:59 -08'00'

¶16

Signature Not Verified

¶17

Digitally Signed By:NEETU N NAIR Signing Da te:1 6.02.2026 14:34:45

¶18

sold the property to Yatindra Nirvik, but retained the electricity connection in her name. Yatindra Nirvik executed agreement to sell with Naresh Kumar. The accused/applicant continued to remain as tenant in the property. It is Naresh Kumar, on whose complaint the FIR was registered.

¶19

Learned counsel for accused/applicant submits that now parties have compromised the disputes and Yatindra Nirvik has now executed sale deed of the property in favour of the accused/applicant. Further, learned counsel for accused/applicant contends that the alleged forged documents were not created by the accused/applicant. It is contended that the accused/applicant does not know English and signs all his documents in Urdu.

¶20

Learned APP submits, and rightly so that settlement between the private parties does not absolve the accused of liability for obtaining transfer of electricity connection on forged documents. However, on instructions of IO, it is submitted by learned prosecutor that they have no document bearing English signatures of the accused/applicant.

¶21

It is not in question that TPDDL received a transfer connection request based on forged documents. The question is as to whether it is the accused/applicant, being tenant who tried to play fraud with TPDDL or it is someone else, who tried to get the accused/applicant falsely involved.

¶22

In response to a specific query, the IO submits that the present accused/applicant is connected with the alleged offence because it is from

¶23

BAIL APPLN. 4496/2024

¶24

Page 2 of 3 pages

¶25

Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI, 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4af GIRISH ec45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - KATHPALIA 7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi, serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff 801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA Date: 2026.02.16 14:26:47 -08'00'

¶26

Signature Not Verified

¶27

Digitally Signed By:NEETU N NAIR Signing Da te:1 6.02.2026 14:34:45

¶28

his mobile phone that electricity connection transfer request was generated and that followed a one-time password (OTP) on the mobile phone of the accused/applicant.

¶29

The IO submits that neither any technical logs from TPDDL reflecting receipt of request from mobile phone of the accused/applicant nor any generation of OTP has been collected during investigation, nor any document bearing English signatures of the accused/applicant has been found.

¶30

In these circumstances, I find no reason to deprive the accused/applicant liberty.

¶31

The application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of his arrest, the accused/applicant shall be released on bail, subject to his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the IO/SHO concerned. The accused/applicant shall join investigation as and when directed in writing by the IO.

¶32

GIRISH KATHPALIA (JUDGE)

¶33

FEBRUARY 16, 2026/ dr

¶34

BAIL APPLN. 4496/2024

¶35

Page 3 of 3 pages

¶36

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:NEETU N NAIR Signing Da te:1 6.02.2026 14:34:45

Aslam v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aslam v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abhishek Jain & Ors. Vs State Govt of N C T of Delhi & Anr.

Sombir @ Totla Vs State of NCT of Delhi

Yash Kumar Vs State of NCT Delhi

Pradeep Sharma Vs the State of NCT of Delhi

Prayagraj Sharma Vs State of NCT of Delhi

Prashant Jain Vs the State of NCT of Delhi