$~

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on: 17.03.2026 Judgment pronounced on: 27.03.2026 Judgment uploaded on: 28.03.2026 + BAIL APPLN. 350/2026 NEH SRIVASTAVA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. K. K. Manan, Senior Advocate with Mr. O.N. Sharma, Ms. Neetu, Ms. Priti, Mr. Bharat Dagger, Ms. Ishika Tyagi, Mr. Manish Sharma and Mr. Gouransh Mehra, Advocates.

versus STATE GNCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Manoj Pant, APP for the State with SI Mohit Parkash, EOW Mr. Madhav Khurana, Senior Advocate with Mr. Abhinav Sekhri and Ms. Shaurya Singh, Advocates for complainants.

CORAM:

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA

JUDGMENT

DR. SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J

1. By way of the present application, the applicant seeks grant of regular bail in case arising out of FIR bearing no. 92/2020, registered at Police Station Economic Offences Wing (EOW), Delhi, for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 420/409/120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 [hereafter „IPC‟].

2. Briefly stated, the facts of the present case are that a complaint had been lodged by Dr. Bachcha Lall alleging that he had been induced by the office bearers of Central Secretariat Services Officers Society (CSSOS), including its President i.e. applicant Neh Srivastava, Vice President and Secretary, to invest in a proposed residential project in Dwarka on the pretext of allotment of a flat. It is alleged that the complainant had been shown purported documents, including alleged approvals from DDA and representations regarding land acquisition under the Land Pooling Policy, by the present applicant, thereby creating a false impression of authenticity. Acting upon such representations, the complainant had paid a sum of ₹50,000/- towards membership of the said society; however, upon subsequent enquiry from DDA, it was revealed that no such society was registered and no approvals had been granted. During the course of investigation conducted by the EOW, it was revealed that multiple victims had been similarly induced by the applicant and other office bearers on the pretext of allotment of flats. It was further revealed that CSSOS had projected itself as a government backed entity by using misleading representations, including the use of the national emblem and claims of association with government bodies, in order to gain public trust. It was further revealed that substantial funds had been collected from investors and were allegedly misappropriated and siphoned off through entities linked to the applicant and his associates. Enquiries with statutory authorities, including DDA and RERA, confirmed that CSSOS had no valid approvals or registration to undertake such a project. On the basis of the material collected during the investigation, the present FIR was registered, and the applicant herein, who was the President of CSSOS, was arrested on

16.11.2022.

3. The learned senior counsel appearing for the present accused/applicant argues that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and there is no material to establish his involvement in the alleged offence. It is contended that the charge- sheet as well as the supplementary charge-sheet have already been filed and, therefore, the applicant is no longer required for the purpose of investigation. It is further submitted that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 16.11.2022, and has remained in judicial custody for a period of 3 years and 2 months. The learned senior counsel also contends that this Court, vide order dated 12.09.2025 passed in Bail Application No. 2710/2025, had granted interim bail to the applicant, noting that he was not likely to evade trial and had not misused the liberty granted to him; and the applicant duly complied with all conditions and surrendered on time. It is further argued that no specific role is attributable to the applicant and that the prosecution case is primarily based on statements of alleged victims, which remain uncorroborated by indepen