New Delhi, July 10, 2026
The Delhi High Court on Friday upheld Bollywood actor Rajpal Yadav’s conviction in multiple cheque dishonour cases, while reducing the quantum of sentence and fine after taking into account the amount already paid by him to the complainant during the pendency of the proceedings.
Pronouncing judgment in a batch of criminal miscellaneous petitions and criminal revision petitions arising out of proceedings under the Negotiable Instruments Act, a single-judge Bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma dismissed Yadav’s challenge to his conviction, holding that his revision petitions were barred by limitation, and also rejected his plea seeking quashing of the complaint cases.
However, the Delhi High Court modified the sentence by giving credit for Rs 2.25 crore deposited by the actor, which had already been released in favour of the complainant, M/s Murli Projects Pvt Ltd.
The High Court reduced Yadav’s sentence from six months to three months’ simple imprisonment in each of the seven complaint cases and reduced the fine from Rs 1.60 crore to Rs 1.05 crore in each case.
It directed that all substantive sentences would run concurrently. Out of the fine amount in each complaint case, Rs 1,04,75,000 will be paid to the complainant, while Rs 25,000 will be credited to the State.
The judgment also reduced the fine imposed on co-convict Radha Rajpal Yadav to Rs 5,51,380 in each complaint case.
While refusing to interfere with the conviction, Justice Sharma observed that despite repeated opportunities and indulgence shown by the Delhi High Court to facilitate an amicable settlement, Yadav failed to honour the undertakings given before the court.
“Needless to state that in case a litigant wishes to choose path of imprisonment rather than abiding by multiple undertakings given by him in the Court, it is entirely his choice. Law is not a script that can be rewritten at the will of an actor, nor can legal positions be altered with every change of strategy whosoever the litigant may be. Courts adjudicate on the basis of settled legal principles and the record before them,” the Delhi High Court said.
It also declined Yadav’s request for release on probation, observing that at the conclusion of the hearing he had stated that he was “not willing to pay any amount to the complainant and would rather go to jail five times than returning the money”.
Dismissing the actor’s revision petitions, the Delhi High Court held that no sufficient cause had been shown to condone the extraordinary delay of 1,894 days.
“The explanation that they remained under a misconception for more than five years that their conviction had already been challenged is neither borne out from the record nor inspires confidence of this Court,” Justice Sharma observed while refusing to condone the delay and affirming the conviction.
The judge also rejected the plea seeking quashing of the complaint cases, holding that the petitions amounted to an indirect challenge to convictions that had already attained finality after the trial and appellate proceedings.
However, the Delhi High Court suspended the modified sentence for two months to enable the petitioners to avail of remedies available in law.
“However, the order on sentence, as modified hereinabove, shall remain suspended for a period of two months from date, to enable the petitioners to avail of such remedies as may be available to them in law, upon expiry of which period, the petitioners shall undergo the sentence in accordance with law,” the judgment said.
The petitions had been filed by Rajpal Yadav against M/s Murli Projects Pvt Ltd and another, challenging the orders passed by the trial court in multiple cheque dishonour cases.
Earlier this year, the Delhi High Court had directed Yadav to surrender before the Jail Superintendent after taking a stern view of his repeated failure to honour settlement commitments despite several opportunities.
Subsequently, he was granted interim suspension of sentence after depositing part of the settlement amount. Rajpal Yadav was convicted and sentenced in 2024 in multiple cheque dishonour cases under the Negotiable Instruments Act.(Agency)
FOLLOW NOW
