Nikesh Kumar Singh v. The State Govt Of NCT Of Delhi & ANR.

$~15 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 472/2023 NIKESH KUMAR SINGH .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Randheer Singh and Ms. Jaya Shakya, Advocates.

versus THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR ......Respondents Through:

Mr. Yasir Rauf Ansari, ASC for the State along with Deepak Kumar, PS Burari, Delhi.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

O R D E R

% 03.09.2025 1.

The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950 read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (formerly Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) seeks quashing of FIR No. 0613/2022 registered under Sections 420/468/471/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at P.S. Burari, Delhi on the basis of a compromise between the Petitioner and Respondent No. 2. 2.

The facts of the case, in brief, are that in April 2022, a complaint was filed by Mayur Tyagi (Respondent No. 2) alleging that the Petitioner, Nikesh Kumar Singh, cheated him by promising job placements in the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC) for a fee. The Complainant collected 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 08/09/2025 at 12:37:50

money, approximately INR 6.92 lakh, from other candidates and paid it to the Petitioner, along with INR 12,700 in cash to the Petitioner's wife. The Petitioner provided forged appointment letters, ID cards, and gate passes to support the job offers. It was later revealed that the Petitioner was not employed with DMRC. After the Petitioner disappeared in early 2021, the complaint was registered, and he was arrested in July 2022 but later granted bail.

3.

The Court notice issued to Respondent No. 2 could not be served as he could not be found at the disclosed address. In terms of order dated 1st July, 2025, the Petitioner did not take any steps to serve the Respondent No.2.

4.

Nonetheless, Mr. Yasir Rauf Ansari, ASC for the State, informs the Court that Respondent No. 2 is merely a middleman in the case, which involves multiple other victims who have been cheated by the Petitioner. 5.

Considering that Respondent No. 2 is untraceable and as per the State's submissions he is only an intermediary with several other victims involved, this Court is of the view that the investigation ought to be completed. As such, at this stage, no case for quashing of the FIR is made out.

6.

Nonetheless, upon completion of the investigation, the Petitioner shall be at liberty to pursue appropriate legal remedies on the same cause of action, as in the present petition.

7.

Dismissed with liberty aforesaid.

SANJEEV NARULA, J SEPTEMBER 3, 2025/MK 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 08/09/2025 at 12:37:50