Delhi High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail to Clerk in Multi State Vehicle Theft Racket

The Delhi High Court has dismissed an anticipatory bail plea filed by Gaurav Bhardwaj, a clerk accused of being part of an inter state vehicle theft and fraudulent registration racket involving tampering of chassis numbers and forged documentation.

The order was passed by Justice Girish Kathpalia, who held that the nature and scale of the alleged offence, coupled with the stage of investigation, did not warrant grant of pre arrest protection.

According to the prosecution, the accused was posted as a clerk in the Road Transport Authority in Bilaspur, Himachal Pradesh, and was allegedly part of a wider syndicate engaged in stealing vehicles, altering their identities, and securing fresh registrations across different states using fabricated records.

Investigators claimed that Bhardwaj had access to the official email credentials of the concerned Sub Divisional Magistrate, which allowed him to retrieve one time passwords from the VAHAN portal. This access allegedly enabled him to bypass verification mechanisms and facilitate registration of stolen vehicles using fake documentation.

The prosecution further alleged that several vehicles fraudulently registered in Bilaspur were assigned registration numbers linked to vehicles supposedly registered in Telangana.

However, authorities from Telangana reportedly confirmed that those registration numbers did not exist in official records, indicating fabrication.

During the hearing, the defence challenged the prosecution’s case, arguing that the process of registering vehicles transferred from Telangana to Himachal Pradesh could not have been executed through an online mechanism and required manual verification.

It was also contended that reliance on Customer Application Forms was insufficient to establish that the accused had accessed or misused the VAHAN system.

The prosecution, however, countered these submissions by pointing to material suggesting continued involvement of the accused in the alleged racket.

It was claimed that Bhardwaj processed multiple registration files beyond official working hours and even after his transfer, continued to obtain OTPs through his successor, indicating ongoing manipulation of the system.

The Court was also informed that several vehicles processed during the accused’s tenure were later found to be stolen and had tampered chassis and registration details.

Additionally, the accused was stated to be absconding, further strengthening the prosecution’s argument that custodial interrogation was necessary to uncover the full extent of the conspiracy.

Taking note of these factors, the Court emphasised that anticipatory bail is a discretionary relief that must be granted cautiously, particularly in cases involving organised crime and systemic fraud.

It observed that the allegations pointed towards a well structured racket operating across state lines, requiring thorough investigation.

Rejecting the plea, the Court held that granting anticipatory bail at this stage would impede the investigating agency’s ability to conduct effective custodial interrogation and trace the broader network involved in the offence.

The Court also recorded that the accused had been placed under suspension and that further analysis of vehicle registration data during his tenure was ongoing, suggesting that the investigation was still unfolding.

In its concluding observation, the Court stated that considering the expanse of the alleged offence and the need to uncover the larger conspiracy, the case was not fit for grant of anticipatory bail.

Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application was dismissed.

Case Title: Gaurav Bhardwaj v. The State Govt of NCT of Delhi

Bench: Justice Girish Kathpalia

Date of Judgement: 20.04.2026