Delhi High Court
CRL.M.C./4897/2025 of RAJ KUMAR JAIN Vs CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION on 21 September 2026
Page 1 of 3 $~21 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010482592025 + CRL.M.C. 4897/2025 CRL.M.A. 21213/2025 RAJ KUMAR JAIN .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Siddhant Prakash Malik, Adv. versus CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION .....Respondent Through: Mrs. Anubha Bhardwaj SPP for
$~21
*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CNR No. DLHC010482592025
+
CRL.M.C. 4897/2025 CRL.M.A. 21213/2025
RAJ KUMAR JAIN
.....Petitioner
Through:
Mr. Siddhant Prakash Malik, Adv.
versus
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
.....Respondent
Through:
Mrs. Anubha Bhardwaj SPP for CBI
with Ms. Ananya Shamshrey, Adv.
for R-1
Mr. Tarkeshwar Nath, Mr. Harshit
Singh and Mr. Anant Dev, Advs. for
R-2/STC
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
O R D E R
%
21.09.2026
1. This is a petition filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 [‘BNSS’] seeking setting aside of the order dated 27.05.2025 [‘impugned order’] passed by the learned Special Judge (PC Act), CBI-13, Rouse Avenue District Courts, New Delhi [‘Trial Court’], whereby the application filed by the Petitioner seeking release of an amount of Rs. 5,00,00,000/- along with accrued interest was dismissed.
2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that, in the case registered by the CBI on the basis of source information, the Petitioner, in order to demonstrate his bona fides, had deposited a sum of Rs. 5,00,00,000/- with Respondent No. 2, the alleged victim, and was accordingly granted bail by the Trial Court in the year 2011. It was further directed that the said amount be converted into a fixed deposit and dealt with subject to the outcome of the civil disputes between the Petitioner and Respondent No. 2.
3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the arbitration proceedings between Respondent No. 2 and M/s Priyanka Overseas Ltd. have since culminated in an award determining the liability of M/s Priyanka Overseas Ltd. as ‘nil’. The said award has attained finality. On this basis, the Petitioner had moved an application before the Trial Court seeking release of the aforesaid amount, which came to be dismissed vide the impugned order dated 27.05.2025, on the ground that it was the condition of granting bail in the year 2011.
4. Learned counsel further submits that the Petitioner has since passed away and, therefore, the circumstance which formed the basis for retaining the amount as a condition of bail no longer survives. It is submitted that the legal representatives of the Petitioner would, accordingly, approach the Trial Court by way of an appropriate application seeking release of the amount lying deposited pursuant to the bail order dated 03.08.2011.
5. Learned counsel appearing for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 have entered appearance.
6. In view of the submissions made on behalf of the Petitioner, the present petition is disposed of as withdrawn, with liberty is reserved to the legal representatives of the Petitioner to approach the Trial Court by way of an appropriate application seeking release of the amount in question.
7. It is clarified that, in the event such an application is filed, the same shall be considered and decided by the Trial Court in accordance with law, on its own merits.
8. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of. MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J SEPTEMBER 21, 2026/msh/AM