$~68 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A. 167/2026 RANJIV SUNEJA .....Appellant Through: Mr. Kiran Kumar Patra, Mr. A.K.

Singh, Mr. Preetish Sahu and Ms.

Abhilasa Pathak, Advocates.

versus THE CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION .....Respondent Through: Mr. Kamat Kant Goel, SPP with Ms. Jyoti Goel, Advocate.

CORAM:

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN

O R D E R

% 12.02.2026 CRL.M.A. 4854/2026 & CRL.M.A. 4855/2026 (for exemption)

Exemptions allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

The applications stand disposed of.

CRL.A. 167/2026

1. By way of this appeal, the appellant challenges a judgment of conviction dated 24.12.2025, by which he has been convicted of offences under Sections 420/120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 [“IPC”] and Sections 13(2)/13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. He also assails an order of sentence dated 09.01.2026, by which he has been sentenced as follows:

2. All the sentences are to run concurrently.

3. Mr. Kamat Kant Goel, learned Special Public Prosecutor, has entered appearance on behalf of the respondent.

4. The appeal is admitted.

5. The Registry is directed to list the appeal in the Regular List, in its own turn.

6. Trial Court record be summoned in electronic form, and placed on the record of this file in the meantime.

7. Written submissions to the appeal may be filed by the parties, with reference to the electronic record of the Court, alongwith copies of any relevant judgments which they wish to rely upon, within eight weeks from today.

CRL.M.(BAIL) 334/2026

1. Issue notice. Mr. Goel accepts notice on behalf of the Central Bureau of Investigation.

2. The appellant seeks suspension of the sentence during the pendency of the appeal, the sentence being of three years of simple imprisonment.

3. Mr. Kiran Kumar Patra, learned counsel for the appellant, relies upon Section 389(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [“CrPC”], and the judgment of the Supreme Court in Sudhir Kumar Jain v. State of Delhi [Criminal Appeal No. 1652/2007, decided on 30.11.2007] [hereinafter, “Sudhir Kumar Jain”]. He points out that by a separate order dated 09.01.2026, the sentence imposed upon the appellant has been suspended by the Special Court for a period of 60 days from 10.01.2026 to 10.03.2026. The order records that the amount of fine imposed upon the appellant has already been paid.

4. Mr. Goel, however, seeks time to file a reply to the application for suspension of sentence. He may do so within four weeks from today.

5. In the meanwhile, having regard to the provisions of Section 389(3) of CrPC and the judgment in Sudhir Kumar Jain, the sentence imposed upon the appellant shall remain suspended, subject to the same terms and conditions as imposed by the Special Court vide order dated

09.01.2026.

6. List on 20.03.2026.

PRATEEK JALAN, J FEBRUARY 12, 2026 SS/AD/