The Delhi High Court has directed Bollywood actor Rajpal Naurang Yadav to surrender before the concerned jail superintendent by 4:00 pm on February 4, 2026, after coming down heavily on him for repeatedly breaching undertakings linked to settlement payments in cheque dishonour cases.
A single-judge bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma passed the order while hearing a batch of petitions filed by Yadav and his wife challenging their conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The petitions relate to a May 2024 sessions court judgment that convicted Yadav and sentenced him to six months’ simple imprisonment.
Why the court pulled back leniency
The High Court had previously shown indulgence by suspending the sentence in 2024 after the actor expressed willingness to explore an amicable settlement with the complainant company, M/s Murli Projects Pvt. Ltd., and the dispute was referred for mediation.
However, the court recorded that since June 2024, Yadav repeatedly sought time on assurances that payments would be made—assurances that were not honoured. In its order, the court said Yadav’s conduct “deserves to be deprecated,” noting repeated non-compliance despite multiple opportunities.
Payment defaults flagged by the court
As per the order, Yadav had sought permission to clear ₹2.5 crore in tranches—₹40 lakh and ₹2.10 crore—but failed to meet even the extended timelines granted by the court. The judge also rejected the explanation of a “typographical error” in demand drafts, observing that no effective steps were taken to rectify the issue or comply with directions.
The court further noted that Yadav was required to make payments of ₹1.35 crore in each case across seven cases (roughly ₹9.45 crore in all). It directed that amounts already deposited with the Registrar General pursuant to earlier orders be released in favour of the complainant company.
What happens next
In the “interest of justice,” the court granted time until February 4, 2026 (4:00 pm) for surrender before the concerned jail superintendent to serve the sentence awarded by the trial court. The matter has been listed on February 5, 2026, seeking compliance from the concerned jail superintendent.
A legal reckoning
The order underscores the court’s view that repeated breaches of court-recorded undertakings—especially after years of adjournments and settlement assurances—cannot be allowed to continue indefinitely. With the suspension of sentence no longer protected by continued compliance, the case has moved into an enforcement phase.
—By Manoj H