Gaurav Bhardwaj vs State Government Of Nct Of Delhi

Girish Kathpalia, J

The accused/applicant seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 07/2026 of Police Station Crime Branch for offence under Section 305(B)/316/ 318(4)/336/338/339/340/3(5)/61(2) BNS.

In furtherance of last order, a detailed status report was filed. I have heard learned senior counsel for accused/applicant and learned APP assisted by IO/SI Rajendra Dhaka, who has also shown me the investigation file.

Broadly speaking, allegation against the accused/applicant is that being a clerk in the Road Transport Authority, Bilaspur, Himachal Pradesh he was a part of a syndicate involving vehicle lifters, who would tamper with the Chassis number of the stolen vehicles and get the same registered on fake documents; and the registration numbers used were mostly of the States far away from the State where the vehicle was registered using fake documents. As per prosecution, such fake registrations were being carried out across the country by the syndicate. The role ascribed to the accused/applicant is that as a clerk in Bilaspur Authority, he had access to the password of email of the concerned SDM, which enabled him access to the OTPs received from the website of Vaahan. Further, according to prosecution most of the vehicles which were got fraudulently registered in Bilaspur were assigned registration numbers of the vehicles registered by Telangana authorities.

On last date, the learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the accused/applicant claimed that the accused/applicant had never processed the registration files without obtaining in original, a no objection from Telangana authorities. But in response, the IO produced on last date the records reflecting that the accused/applicant had processed a number of files, that too beyond office hours.

Today it is contended by learned senior counsel for accused/applicant that the prosecution case is not reliable because firstly, it is not possible to contemplate a situation where Telangana vehicles are being registered online because registration of vehicles coming to Himachal Pradesh from Telangana could be done only manually and not online; and secondly, merely from CAF (Customer Application Form) it is not possible to infer that the concerned mobile phone was used to access any website, like Vaahan. Therefore, according to learned senior counsel, this is a fit case to grant anticipatory bail.

In response, the IO has produced before me a communication dated 21.02.2026 received from Telangana authorities, claiming that not only the numbers being investigated against are fake but even no series of such numbers exists in the records of the RTO, Hyderabad, Telangana.

As per the status report dated 05.03.2026, on a number of occasions, the accused/applicant obtained the OTP from his successor clerk Subhash Chand for registering the tainted vehicles himself even subsequent to his transfer from Bilaspur authority.

Further, according to prosecution, complete data of the vehicles registered during the posting period of the accused/applicant is still being analysed and the accused/applicant has absconded, due to which further investigation is being hampered and custodial interrogation of the accused/applicant is required. It is also apprised by prosecution that the accused/applicant has been placed under suspension vide order dated 03.02.2026.

According to the investigation carried so far, some of the vehicles (specified in the status report) registered and approved by the accused/applicant also were examined and their registration numbers were found tampered with. For example, the original registration number of Toyota Fortuner No. HP-24-E-3974 is UP-16-DU-7447 and the same was found to be a stolen vehicle according to e-FIR dated 15.05.2025 of PS Malviya Nagar. Similarly, another vehicle bearing no. DL-8CB-C-2546 was found registered under a fake number HP-24-E-4823 and the same was found to be a stolen vehicle according to e-FIR dated 12.08.2025 of PS Kirti Nagar, New Delhi. In other words, the scope of investigation covers a number of States and not just Telangana.

Keeping in mind the expanse of the offence and the stage of investigation, I do not find it fit case to grant anticipatory bail, thereby depriving the investigating officer an opportunity to carry out custodial interrogation. Therefore, the application is dismissed.