Meenakshi v. State Of NCT Delhi & ANR.

$~41 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 630/2025, CRL.M.A. 5872/2025 MEENAKSHI .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Vinod Kumar and Ms. Arpita Rai, Advs.

versus STATE OF NCT DELHI & ANR.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr. Anand V. Khatri, ASC for State with W/SI Manisha, PS: Hauz Khas.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA

O R D E R

% 24.02.2025 CRL.M.A. 5873/2025 Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions. Application stands disposed of.

W.P.(CRL) 630/2025, CRL.M.A. 5872/2025 1.

Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ('BNSS') has been preferred on behalf of the petitioner for quashing the FIR No. 406/2024, under Sections 406/498-A/34/IPC, registered at Police Station: Hauz Khas and proceedings emanating therefrom.

2.

Learned ASC for the State appears on advance notice. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that present FIR has been wrongly registered within the jurisdiction of PS: Hauz Khas and the allegations do not reflect commission of any offence by the petitioner. 4.

Learned ASC for the State opposes the petition and submits that the complaint was initially inquired into by CAW Cell, Saket. He further submits W.P.(CRL) 630/2025 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 02/07/2025 at 00:44:14

that the proceedings were transferred to PS: Kalkaji, since respondent No. 2 / complainant had filed a copy of the complaint with PS: Kalkaji and the in-laws of complainant were residing within jurisdiction of PS: Kalkaji. He further clarifies that subsequently during the course of inquiry, complainant made a request for transferring the complaint to South-East District, PS: Hauz Khas, since the parents of the complainant were residing within the said jurisdiction. However, the place of residence of complainant is disputed by learned counsel for petitioner. Learned ASC further contends that the case is at the initial stage of investigation and it may be premature to make any observations on the merits of the case, at this stage. 5.

Taking into consideration the statement made on behalf of learned ASC for the State, this Court is of the considered opinion that, since the case is at initial stage of investigation, it may be premature and inappropriate for this Court to interfere in the proceedings. An appropriate view can only be taken after the investigation is completed and a final report is filed by the Police. In the facts and circumstances, petition is dismissed, keeping open all the rights and contentions of the petitioner, to be taken after the filing of the final report by the Police. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, J.

FEBRUARY 24, 2025/R W.P.(CRL) 630/2025 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 02/07/2025 at 00:44:14