Delhi High Court - Orders
Shazli Niaz vs State (Nct Of Delhi) on 26 November, 2025
Author: Sanjeev Narula
Bench: Sanjeev Narula
$~52 (25.11.2025)
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ BAIL APPLN. 4539/2025
SHAZLI NIAZ .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Karan S. Thukral, Advocate
along with Mr. Tanmay Mehta, Ms.
Vaishnavi Arora, Mr. Sachin Arora
and Mr. Harsh Jain, Advocates.
versus
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Hitesh Vali, APP for the State
along with SI Rajak Ahamed, PS CR
Park.
Mr. Sachin Puri, Senior Advocate
along with Mr. Kunal Malhoytra, Mr.
Milan Deep Singh and Mr. Kunal
Jain, Advocates for the all the
Complainants.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
ORDER
% 26.11.2025 [The matter has been taken up today as 25th November, 2025 was declared a holiday on account of 350th anniversary of "Guru Teg Bahadur's Martyrdom Day"]
1. This petition under Section 482 read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 20231 (corresponding to Sections 438 1 "BNSS"
BAIL APPLN. 4539/2025 Page 1 of 3This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/11/2025 at 21:44:54 and 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 19732) seeks pre-arrest bail in the proceedings arising from FIR No. 104/2025 dated 15 th May, 2025, registered at P.S. Chitranjan Park, Delhi, under Sections 420 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 18603.
2. The case of the prosecution is based upon a complaint lodged by the complainants, who are practising advocates. The complainants, Mr. Jaikush Hoon and Ms. Archana Hoon, were allegedly induced by the Applicant to invest in the business of the co-accused, namely the Applicant's husband and sons, engaged in a tile business. However, the payments made by the complainants, as detailed in the FIR, were allegedly diverted towards cryptocurrency transactions. When the complainants demanded the return of their money, the accused persons failed to do so. It is alleged that out of a total amount of INR 55,00,000/-, only INR 7,50,000/- has yet been returned.
3. It is further alleged that the Applicant had specifically undertaken before the Trial Court, to return the aforesaid amount to the complainants; however, this assurance was subsequently not honoured.
4. In response, Mr. Tanmay Mehta, counsel for the Applicant, contends that the Applicant has been falsely implicated. He submits that the alleged payments were made to the Applicant's husband and son, and that she has no connection with their business. He further argues that the complainants, being practising advocates, cannot plausibly claim to have been induced solely at the instance of the Applicant and that it was their own decision. He submits that, in any event, the Applicant is ready and willing to join investigation, and that any delay on her part is attributable to her seeking 2 "CrPC"
3"IPC"BAIL APPLN. 4539/2025 Page 2 of 3
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/11/2025 at 21:44:54 appropriate legal remedies. Counsel assures that the Applicant shall fully cooperate with the investigating agency.
5. In view of the foregoing, the Applicant is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer tomorrow, i.e., on 27 th November, 2025, at 4:00 PM.
6. Status report filed on or before the next date of hearing.
7. No coercive action be taken against the Applicant till the next date of hearing.
8. Re-notify on 14th January, 2026.
SANJEEV NARULA, J NOVEMBER 26, 2025/MK BAIL APPLN. 4539/2025 Page 3 of 3 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/11/2025 at 21:44:54