Delhi High Court – Orders
Baldev Raj Arora vs State Of Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi on 26 February, 2026
$~15
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ BAIL APPLN. 172/2026
BALDEV RAJ ARORA .....Applicant
Through: Mr. Anish Kumar, Mr. Avinash
Kumar Sharma, Ms. Nikita Kumari
and Ms. Anushka Singh,
Advocates.
versus
STATE OF GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Raghuinder Verma, APP for
the State with Mr. Aditya Vikram
Singh, Advocate
SI Manish Kumar, PS-NR-I, Crime
Branch.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE
ORDER
% 26.02.2026
1. By virtue of the present application under Section 483 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), the applicant, namely
Baldev Raj Arora, seeks grant of regular bail in proceedings arising out of
FIR No.28/2021 dated 23.03.2021 registered at PS.: Crime Branch West,
New Delhi under Sections 419/420/467/468/471/120B/34 of the Indian
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and Section 82 of the Registration Act, 1908.
2. Briefly put, as per complaint of one Mr. Ramesh Kapoor
(Complainant), owner of property bearing no.78, Bhera Enclave, Paschim
Vihar, Delhi, compromising of three floors and one basement (said
property), in August, 2018, the Complainant got to know from Union
Bank of India that various Sale Deeds have been executed by unknown
BAIL APPLN. 172/2026 Page 1 of 4
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 02/03/2026 at 20:38:36
persons qua the said property. It later transpired that qua the said property,
first a housing loan of Rs.2,35,00,000/- was sanctioned from LIC Housing
Finance Limited by some unidentified persons after executing a Sale Deed
qua the ground floor thereof, then by another application by some
unidentified persons before Punjab National Bank, Kotla Mubarakpur
Branch (PNB) a term loan of Rs.2,17,50,000/- has been sanctioned qua
the first floor thereof, and finally by another housing loan application by
some unidentified persons before Canara Bank, Pitampura a loan of
Rs.95,80,000/- lakhs had been sanctioned thereof.
3. Upon PNB approaching the Economic Offence Wing qua the said
fraud/ scam, investigation was handed over the Crime Branch, and the
present FIR was registered thence. During investigation as also based on
the disclosure statement of one Mr. Shiv Nandan Pareek, being the Direct
Selling Agent (DSA) of the Canara Bank, it was evinced that the applicant
herein played an essential role in all the aforesaid conspiracy, and by
forging various documents to execute the said Sale Deeds, he
impersonated himself as the Complainant before the said Banks and the
incumbent Sub-Registrar. The aforesaid were corroborated by the
documentary evidences and the statements of witnesses under Section 161
of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) during investigation.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant, submits that the applicant is
facing incarceration since 08.04.2021 despite the fact that the investigation
qua the present applicant stands completed and as on date as many as 30
witnesses are yet to be examined, which anyways will take time. Relying
upon “State of Kerela vs. Raneef; 2011 (1) SCC 784, Sanjay Chandra vs.
CBI; (2012) 1 SCC 40, Satender Kumar Antil vs. CBI & Anr.; (2022) 10
BAIL APPLN. 172/2026 Page 2 of 4
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 02/03/2026 at 20:38:36
SCC 51, Gurbaksh Singh Sibba vs. State of Punjab; (1980) 2 SCC 565
and Manish Sisodia vs. Central Bureau of Investigation; (2024) 12 SCC
691, the learned counsel submits that the primary purpose of bail is to
ensure the applicant’s presence at trial, mere allegations of flight risk or
evidence tampering, without substance, are not sufficient to deny bail as
also that the Courts should consider delay in concluding the trial whilst
dealing with a bail application. As such, the learned counsel seeks grant of
bail to the applicant.
5. Per contra, learned APP for State after handing over a copy of the
latest Status Report, which is taken on record submits that the pivotal
involvement of the applicant in the present scam/ fraud has already been
recognized by this Court vide order dated 16.09.2021 in BAIL APPLN.
2853/2021 and the allegations attributed to him are of a serious and grave
nature. The applicant has previously misused the interim bail granted to
him vide order dated 13.07.2021 in BAIL APPLN. 1412/2021. The
learned APP further submits that the applicant poses a significant flight
risk and there exists a reasonable apprehension that, if released on bail, the
applicant may tamper with evidence and exert influence over material
witnesses. Thus, dismissal of the present bail application is pressed.
6. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as also the learned APP for
the State and also perused the documents as also the Status Report on
record as also the judgments relied upon.
7. As borne out, the present FIR does reflect that the applicant was
involved in repeated acts of forgery of multifarious documents including
one by DDA as well, and that too involving different Banks, and under the
guise of impersonating multiple identities with huge transactions of
BAIL APPLN. 172/2026 Page 3 of 4
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 02/03/2026 at 20:38:36
money. Thus, there are more than one factors cumulatively involved,
which has been corroborated by documentary evidence as also statements
of witnesses under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C.
8. The above reflect that the applicant is not a fly by night operator
and was all throughout consciously proceeding with the chain of events
leading to registration of the present FIR.
9. In view of the aforesaid, especially the grave and serious allegations
against the applicant and the persistent conduct of the applicant, even
when he was out on bail, the present application is dismissed.
10. Needless to say, the expression of opinions, if any, are for the
purposes of adjudication of the present application only, they shall have
no bearing on the overall merit/ trial involved in the matter.
SAURABH BANERJEE, J.
FEBRUARY 26, 2026/NA
BAIL APPLN. 172/2026 Page 4 of 4
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 02/03/2026 at 20:38:36