BAIL APPLN./3777/2026 of WASIM FAROOQI Vs STATE OF NCT OF DELHI on 9 September 2026

O R D E R

% 09.09.2026

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. The present applications have been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘BNSS’) seeking grant of anticipatory bail to the applicants in FIR No. 39/2026 registered at Crime Branch, Delhi under Sections 318(4), 319 and 340 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘BNS’). B

3. Briefly stated, the aforesaid FIR was registered on the complaint of Kumar Sumit in relation to construction of a residential property at Sector-06, Bahadurgarh, Haryana. It is alleged that pursuant to a construction agreement / BOQ dated 15.02.2025 with M/s WOW Constructions and Interiors, approximately Rs.35 lakh was paid towards the construction of the said property; however, the construction work was not completed as agreed. The present applicants have been arrayed as accused in the aforesaid FIR

4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are not at fault and that the dispute is essentially civil in nature, which has been given a criminal colour.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the complainant, as well as learned APP for the State, appearing on advance notice, submit that the allegations disclose a recurring modus operandi adopted by the applicants against persons intending to construct their homes. It is submitted that, despite receiving substantial amounts from the complainant, negligible construction was carried out at the site and the amount received was also not refunded. It is further submitted that similar complaints have been received by the Delhi Police from other persons against the applicants.

6. It is further submitted that the address furnished in the affidavit filed along with the present application is incorrect and that an incorrect address has deliberately been furnished before this Court.

7. This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties involved and perused the material placed on record.

8. Insofar as the address furnished by the applicants is concerned, the Investigating Officer (IO) submits that upon visiting the said premises, the same was found locked. Upon inquiry from the neighbours, it transpired that the premises had remained locked for more than ten months and that several persons had been visiting the premises making inquiries about the applicants.

9. Learned counsel for the complainant at this stage submits that an FIR has also been registered against the accused persons at Ghaziabad involving allegations of similar nature.

10. Per contra, learned counsel for the applicants submits that the said matters have already been settled with the respective complainants.

11. However, the fact that such matters have subsequently been settled does not, by itself, efface the allegation that similar complaints had arisen against the applicants. The said circumstance, at this stage, lends support to the submission advanced by the learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the complainant regarding the alleged recurring nature of the transactions.

12. Having regard to the nature of the allegations and the existence of prior similar complaints against the applicants, this Court finds no ground for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicants.

13. Therefore, the present bail application is dismissed and is accordingly, disposed of.

14. Pending applications in both the matters also stand disposed of.

15. A copy of this order be sent to the concerned learned Trial Court for necessary information and compliance.

16. The order be uploaded on the website forthwith. MADHU JAIN, J SEPTEMBER 9, 2026/b/PG