Naveen Kumar Chauhan v. Delhi Police

$~98 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 761/2026 and CM APPL. 3728/2026 NAVEEN KUMAR CHAUHAN .....Petitioner Through:

The petitioner in person.

versus DELHI POLICE .....Respondent Through:

Mr Vivek Sharma And Ms Bakshi Vinita, Advs.

Mr. Vivek Nagar and Mr. Mohit Auluck, Advs for R-1.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV

O R D E R

% 20.01.2026 1.

The petitioner claims to be a resident of Property bearing no. A-1/59, 3rd Floor, Freedom Fighter Enclave, Neb Sarai, New Delhi-110068. 2.

It is the case of the petitioner that the father of the petitioner was the owner of the property bearing no. A-3, Freedom Fighter Culture Centre, IGNOU Road, Neb Sarai, Tehsil Mehrauli, New Delhi-110068, and he expired on 24.10.2024. After his demise, the petitioner, Mr. Rajkumar Chauhan and Ms. Shashi Kumar became caretakers and co-owners of the said property.

3.

The Court earlier directed for maintenance of status quo in some other proceedings. There also seems to be a civil suit pending between the mother and sister of the petitioner bearing Civil Suit No. CS (OS) 2016/2011. Even in the said civil suit, an injunction order dated 09.08.2021 is stated to be 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 23/01/2026 at 12:35:45

passed.

4.

The petitioner, by way of this petition, complaints that some unknown persons have illegally trespassed and are residing in the aforesaid property. He made a police complaint and despite that no action has been taken. 5.

Looking at the nature of the dispute which has emerged in the petition, the Court is not inclined to issue notice to the respondents and rather grant liberty to the petitioner to take appropriate recourse in accordance with law either by filing application in Civil Suit or to take a fresh remedy.

6.

The High Court in exercise of powers conferred under Article 226 of the Constitution may not be required to direct the private individuals to vacate any individual's property. The same would clearly fall within the realm of the private civil dispute and there are remedies to invoke, for mitigation of such grievance.

7.

Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed.

PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J JANUARY 20, 2026 aks/ap 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 23/01/2026 at 12:35:45