Abdul Bari v. State Of NCT Delhi And ORS.

$~94 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 936/2026, CRL.M.A. 8897/2026 & CRL.M.A. 8898/2026 ABDUL BARI .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Waiz Islam, Mr. Mohd. Ubaid, Mr.

Sunil Chaudhry, Mr.

Muzammil & Mr.

Ashraf, Advocates.

versus STATE OF NCT DELHI AND ORS.

.....Respondent Through:

Mr.

Yasir Rauf Ansari, ASC (Criminal) with Mr. Alok Sharma, Advocate.

SI Mohit Yadav, PS Keshav Puram.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN

O R D E R

% 24.03.2026 1.

The petitioner has filed the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, seeking police protection from the threats of respondent Nos. 3 to 6, who are residents of the same locality. 2.

It is contended that the petitioner is constructing a residential house at premises bearing No. 34/5, Plot No. 11, Gali No. 5, Onkar Nagar-B, Tri Nagar, New Delhi-110035, which is owned by him, after obtaining the requisite permissions. It is further alleged that respondent Nos. 3 to 6 have extended threats to the petitioner on communal grounds. The petitioner claims to have made several complaints to the police and has The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

also initiated proceedings under Section 175(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ["BNSS"] before the jurisdictional Magistrate, seeking registration of an FIR against respondent Nos. 3 to 6. 3.

As far as the present petition is concerned, Mr. Yasir Rauf Ansari, learned Additional Standing Counsel, who appears on advance notice, submits that police has filed an action taken report before the learned Magistrate on 29.01.

2026, in which it is stated as follows: "It is respectfully further submitted that on receipt of complaint from complainant Abdul Bari alleging threats, extortion, communal remarks and obstruction in constriction by Ashwani, Manish Kumar, Sachin Sharma and others, enquiry was conducted by the undersigned by visiting the spot, hearing both parties, during which it was found that both parties reside in the same street opposite each other belong to different communities and have long-standing personal rivalry, and several cross-complaints have earlier been received from both sides, however during enquiry no independent eyewitness, CCTV footage or other substantive evidence could be found to substantiate the allegations of extortion, unlawful assembly or communal provocation, though tension between both parties was evident and apprehension of breach of peace existed, therefore preventive action was taken vide DD No.

68-A dated 28.10.2425 U/s 126/169 BNSS against both parties and they were produced before the Hon'ble SEM Court, Jahangir Puri, where proceedings are pending, and local beat staff has been directed to keep strict vigil to maintain peace in the area." 4.

Mr. Ansari submits that a section of Central Reserve Police Force personnel has already been deployed in the locality and, as noted above, the concerned Station House Officer ("SHO") has been directed to ensure that strict vigil is maintained, and communal peace is preserved. He further submits that there have been complaints and cross-complaints between the petitioner and respondent Nos. 3 to 6, and that the police will The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

take all necessary steps in accordance with law, including taking preventive action, as and when the need arises. 5.

In view of the threats apprehended by the petitioner, the telephone numbers of the concerned SHO and the Beat Constable will also be provided to the petitioner, so that he may contact them in the event of any imminent threat.

6.

Having regard to the above submission, no further orders are sought in this writ petition. The writ petition, alongwith the pending applications, is therefore disposed of, in terms of the submission of Mr. Ansari recorded above.

7.

It is made clear that the petitioner is at liberty to pursue the proceedings instituted by him under Section 175(3) of the BNSS, before the learned Magistrate, which may be decided in accordance with law. 8.

It is made clear that this Court has not issued notice to respondent Nos. 3 to 6, and the observations made hereinabove are not intended to be an expression of opinion on the veracity of the allegations made by the petitioner against them.

PRATEEK JALAN, J MARCH 24, 2026 'pv/JM'/ The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.