Delhi HC Denies Anticipatory Bail to Alleged Mastermind in ₹1 Crore Fake Currency Scam [Read Order]

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has dismissed the anticipatory bail plea of Naseem Sheikh alias Thakur, alleged to be the key conspirator in a syndicate that duped a man of Rs. 1 crore by promising him Rs. 1.20 crore in cash and handing over a suitcase of counterfeit notes.

Justice Vimal Kumar Yadav passed the order on 06.11.2026 in Bail Appln. 4817/2026, filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The plea for interim protection was not pressed. Opening with a note on cybercrime, the court observed that “Internet wolves, operating in packs, are increasingly on the prowl in cyberspace.”

According to the prosecution, FIR No. 09/2025 was registered on 05.06.2025 at PS Special Cell, IFSO, Delhi, on the complaint of Akash Verma, who said he transferred Rs. 1 crore by RTGS on 04.06.2025 to a Bank of Baroda account in the name of Rashtriya Manav Party, on the assurance of receiving Rs. 1.20 crore in cash. The suitcase handed over to him allegedly contained notes marked “Full of Fun” and “Churan Label”, along with books.

Several accused were arrested, and the applicant was named as the alleged mastermind in the co-accused’s disclosure statements of 20.06.2025. He is accused of coordinating the accused and supervising the transactions, with co-accused allegedly routing the funds and one, Tara Maheshwari, handing him about Rs. 93 lakh after keeping her share. The charge-sheet was filed on 16.09.2025, and Rs. 92,56,500 is said to remain unrecovered.

The applicant’s counsel argued that he was not named in the complaint or FIR, that his involvement rests mainly on a co-accused’s disclosure, that all other accused have been granted bail, and that he is willing to cooperate. The Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the plea, calling him a principal conspirator and ultimate beneficiary who did not join the investigation on 27.08.2026 despite notice under Section 35(3) BNSS, and whose custodial interrogation is needed to trace the money and identify others.

The court accepted that he was not named initially, but noted that the investigation allegedly found electronic evidence and a money trail beyond the disclosure statement, which prima facie indicate his involvement, with evidentiary value to be tested at trial. It said the allegations disclose an organised operation, not an isolated act of cheating, with the applicant attributed a pivotal role and a substantial part of the proceeds.

The court held that his later willingness to cooperate does not address the investigating agency’s concern when a substantial amount is untraced. It added that bail to co-accused was no ground for parity, since his role is distinct and more serious, and that the status report also links him to another case with a similar modus operandi. The nature and gravity of the allegations, the role attributed, the unrecovered amount and the failure to join the investigation, taken together, did not warrant anticipatory bail, and custodial interrogation could not be brushed aside.

The application was dismissed, with the court clarifying that its observations are confined to this application and are not an opinion on the merits at trial.

Appearances:

For the Applicant: Mr. Rahul Sharma and Mr. Gyan Ranjan, Advocates.

For the State: Mr. Manoj Pant, Additional Public Prosecutor. 

Case Title: Naseem Sheikh vs. State of NCT of Delhi, Bail Appln. 4817/2026

[Read Order]