The Delhi High Court has rejected an anticipatory bail plea filed by Naseem Sheikh in an alleged ₹1 crore organised fraud involving counterfeit currency. Justice Vimal Kumar Yadav observed that the applicant's alleged role in coordinating the operation, the substantial amount still unrecovered and his failure to join the investigation weighed against granting pre-arrest protection. The Court held that custodial interrogation was necessary in the circumstances of the case.
Background
According to the prosecution, FIR No. 09/2025 was registered on June 5, 2025, at the Special Cell, IFSO, Delhi, following a complaint by Akash Verma.
The complainant allegedly transferred ₹1 crore through RTGS to a bank account held in the name of Rashtriya Manav Party. However, the suitcase subsequently handed over to him allegedly contained counterfeit notes marked "Full of Fun" and "Churan Label", along with books.
The prosecution alleged that Sheikh coordinated the accused persons, assigned them specific roles and supervised the transactions. WhatsApp conversations, call detail records, witness statements and banking records were relied upon during the investigation. An amount of ₹92,56,500 was stated to remain unrecovered.
The Court noted that although Sheikh was not named in the original complaint, the investigation had allegedly uncovered electronic evidence and a financial trail indicating his involvement.
The Bench observed:
"The question of the evidentiary value of such material is a matter to be examined during trial and cannot be conclusively determined at this stage."
The Court also considered that the applicant had failed to join the investigation despite receiving notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS.
It further observed:
"His subsequent willingness to cooperate, by itself, does not adequately address the apprehension expressed by the investigating agency, particularly when a substantial amount remains untraced."
On the question of parity with other accused who had secured bail, the Court noted that the role attributed to Sheikh was distinct and substantially more serious.
Finding that the allegations, the applicant's attributed role, the unrecovered amount and his failure to join the investigation collectively weighed against granting relief, the Delhi High Court dismissed the anticipatory bail application.
The Court held that the requirement of custodial interrogation could not be brushed aside. It clarified that its observations would not affect the merits of the case during trial.
Case Details
Case Title: Naseem Sheikh v. State of NCT of Delhi
Case Number: BAIL APPLN. 4817/2026
Judge: Justice Vimal Kumar Yadav
Decision Date: November 6, 2026
