Disposed

Tajinder Kaur v. the State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)

Delhi HC13 Feb 2026BAIL APPLN./568/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail sought in a cheating and forgery FIR alleging fraudulent suppression of co-owners while mortgaging property for a loan. Chargesheet filed; case at arguments on charge. Considering the applicant's age (64) and medical condition, the court granted bail on a personal bond with surety.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with one like surety, subject to satisfaction of Trial Court/CMM/Duty Magistrate.

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

¶1

$~7

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- BAIL APPLN. 568/2026

¶4

TAJINDER KAUR .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Ravin Rao with Mr. Pallav Gupta, Mr. Akshit Sawal, Mr. Ayan Sharma, Ms. Jannat Garg, Ms. Palak Jerath, Mr. Ayush Kumar, Ms. Sheena Munjal and Mr. Abhimanyu Bhargava, Advocates.

¶6

versus

¶7

THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent Through: Ms. Priyanka Dalal, APP for the State with SI Rahul and SI Dhananjay Gupta, PS Kirti Nagar.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN

¶10

O R D E R % 13.02.2026

¶11

Applicant seeks regular bail in FIR No.198/2024 dated 20.04.2024 registered at PS Kirti Nagar, for commission of offences under Section 420/468/471/120B, IPC, 1860.

¶12

The present FIR has been registered on the basis of the report lodged by M/s Hinduja Housing Finance Limited through its authorized representative whereby they made allegations, inter alia, against the applicant Tajinder Kaur, her son-Navpreet Singh and daughter-in-law-Vineet Kaur.

¶13

It was alleged that they had applied for a loan of Rs.75 lacs by mortgaging their property situated at Mansarover Garden. As per the

¶14

BAIL APPLN. 568/2026

¶15

¶16

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 16/02/2026 at 12:06:47

¶17

documents, the applicant had claimed herself to be the owner of upper ground floor and first floor of the abovesaid property by virtue of a Relinquishment Deed executed by her son Navpreet Singh in her favour and Partition Deed dated 16.08.2021. Total loan of Rs.75 lacs was disbursed. However, later on, it came to knowledge of the complainant that there were two more shareholders in the abovesaid property i.e. another son and daughter of the applicant, which fact was suppressed in a deceitful manner and even the Surviving Member Certificate was not containing their names. Thus, there was calculated fraud and forgery of documents, which the complainant learnt when it received summons in a partition suit filed by one Satinder Singh.

¶18

Learned Addl. P.P. for the State submits that the applicant was in possession of two original Relinquishment Deeds and one another Relinquishment Deed was used by them for cheating Ms. Anu Bansal, for which a separate FIR has been registered. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, admittedly, there is a Relinquishment Deed executed by Navpreet Singh (son of the applicant) and even the Surviving Member Certificate does not contain the names of one another son and daughter of the applicant but according to him, there is no case of forgery, and, at best, it can be said to be a case of suppression and concealment of facts.

¶19

Applicant Tajinder Kaur was arrested on 13.01.2025 and is in jail since 16.01.2025. She is, reportedly, 64 years of age. Report about her medical condition was sought from Jail Authorities and, as per the report received from Medical Officer-in-charge, Central Jain No.6 Dispensary, she is patient of hypertension, asthma and lower back issues. Undoubtedly, she is getting requisite medication and treatment but the report also indicates that she is

¶20

BAIL APPLN. 568/2026

¶21

¶22

¶23

wheelchair-bound, right from the day of her lodgment in the Jail.

¶24

Chargesheet has already been filed and the case is at the stage of arguments on charge.

¶25

Keeping in mind the overall facts of the case, the age and medical condition of applicant and without making any observation with respect to merits of the case, the applicant is directed to be released on bail on her furnishing personal bond in a sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety of like amount, subject to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court/CMM/Duty Magistrate.

¶26

The application stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.

¶27

MANOJ JAIN, J

¶28

FEBRUARY 13, 2026 st/pb

¶29

BAIL APPLN. 568/2026

¶30

¶31

Tajinder Kaur v. the State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tajinder Kaur v. the State (Govt. of 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

Raj Kumar Samnta Vs the State (Govt of NCT of Delhi)

Gaurav Sharma Vs State & Anr.

Deepak Gupta Vs the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi Though S.H.O. P.S Shahbad Dairy Delhi

Parvender Paul Singh Puri Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Davinder Singh & Ors. Vs State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Dipin @ Dipin Khoba Vs the State NCT of Delhi and Ors.