Manu Bhardwaj v. NCT Of Delhi & ANR.
$~83 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 1088/2026 MANU BHARDWAJ .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. P.S. Sridhar Raj, Mr. Abhishek Pandey and Ms. Sharmila Leuka, Advocates.
versus NCT OF DELHI & ANR.
.....Respondents Through:
Mr. Yasir Rauf Ansari, ASC for the State.
SI Anil, P.S. Sagarpur.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI
O R D E R
% 06.04.2026 CRL.M.A. 10225/2026 (exemption) Exemption granted, subject to just exceptions. The application stands disposed of.
CRL.M.A. 10227/2026 By way of the present application filed under section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, the applicant/petitioner including vakalatnama.
2.
For the reasons stated in the application, which is duly supported by affidavit, the present application is allowed. 3.
The application is accordingly disposed-of.
W.P.(CRL) 1088/2026 & CRL.M.A. 10226/2026 (stay) 4.
By way of the present petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with section 482 of the Code of Criminal W.P.(CRL) 1088/2026 Page 1 of 4 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
Procedure 1973 ('Cr.P.C.'), the petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No. 367/2023 dated 25.07.2023 registered under sections 498-A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at P.S.: Sagar Pur, South West District, Delhi.
5.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits, that the petitioner is ordinarily a resident of Warsaw, Poland and has had no engagement with respondent No.2 (complainant), who is his brother's wife.
6.
Counsel submits, that apart from the generalised allegations, no specific act or omission has been attributed to the petitioner in the subject FIR. He submits, that accordingly the FIR does not disclose commission of any cognizable offence against the petitioner. 7.
Issue notice.
8.
Mr. Y.R. Ansari, learned ASC appears on behalf of the State on advance copy; and accepts notice.
9.
Mr. Ansari draws attention to the following portion of the subject FIR, which reads as under:
"20/5/22 मेरे देवर भ्ቐ ने मुझ से बतनीजी से बात की और दहेज़ को लेकर ताने मारे । मेरे देवर ने मुझ से कहा मुझे तेरे बाप के ददए हुए उपहार और कपडे पसंद नहीं आये ,आगे से कुछ भी दो तो मुझे और मेरे बीबी को तो Branded कपडे व समान देना। मेरे देवर ने कपेड़ उठा कर मेरे मुँह पर फेंक ददए । मेरे ससुराल प्ቌ में सभी ने सास और पदत नंद नदोई को कपडे पसंद न आने पर कपडे मेरे मुँह पे फेंक ददए थे । मेरे ससुराल वालो ने दहेज़ के लालच में मुझे बहुत बेह्ሸत दकया, मानदसक पीड़ा पहुंचाही और मुझे नौकरानी बना के रखा 28/5/22 मेरे देवर मनु ने मुझे घर में अकेला पा कर पहले तो मुझे दहेज़ के दलए तने मारे, जब में अपने कमरे में जाने लगी तो मुझे जबरद्ቜी मुझे रोका और मुझे दकस दकया और मेरे सीने पर अपना हाथ रखा । जब मैंने जोर से ध्ሪा देते हुए अपने देवर पे ग़ु्ተा दकया डाटा की यह ्ቄा ब्ቈमीजी है, तो मेरे देवर ने कहा इतना ्ቄा गु्ተा कर रही है, इतना हऺ तो मेरा बनता है तेरे पर । मेरे देवर ने कहा तू भाभी है मेरी और भाभी देवर में W.P.(CRL) 1088/2026 Page 2 of 4 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
इतना तो चलता है । जब मैंने यह बात अपने पदत और सास को बताई तो दोनों हॅसने लगे और मुझसे मेरे पदत और सास ने कहा इसमें कोन -सी. बड़ी बात है भाभी देवर में इतना तो चलता है । ....... मेरी सास, पदत और देवर ने मुझे बहुत ही ्ቋादा मांग पूरी करने के दलए परेशान दकया, मानदसक पीड़ा पहुंचाई और सारे घर का काम करवाया और अपनी कूरता मुझ पर ददखाई।......
****** "...... घर पर मेरी सास न् और देवर साथ थे। मेरी सास ने दफर दरवाजा नहीं खोला और मुझे जाने को कहा । जब मैं वहां से नहीं गई तो मेरे देवर व न् ने मुझे सीदढ़ओ से ध्ሪा ददया......"
10.
Mr. Ansari accordingly submits, that the FIR does contain specific allegations against the petitioner. Learned ASC informs the court, that the petitioner has not joined investigation so far. 11.
Learned ASC further submits that in her statement recorded under 164 of the Cr.P.C., the complainant has reiterated the allegations in the FIR, whereupon the offence under section 354 of the IPC has also been added during investigation.
12.
Mr. Ansari also submits, that requisite notice under section 41-A of the Cr.P.C. was issued to the petitioner via e-mail as well as by affixation. This assertion is however disputed by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.
13.
Upon being queried as to the grounds on which the present petition is premised, in light of the law laid-down by the Supreme Court in State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Bhajan Lal & Ors.1, learned counsel for the petitioner submits, that the allegations against the petitioner are 1 (1992) Supp. (1) SCC 335 W.P.(CRL) 1088/2026 Page 3 of 4 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
general in nature and do not constitute any criminal offence as alleged.
14.
Upon a conspectus of the submissions made, and upon perusal of the subject FIR, this court is of the view that certain specific allegations, with date and actions alleged, are contained in the subject FIR; and that accordingly no ground is made-out for quashing of the subject FIR.
15.
The present petition is accordingly dismissed at the stage of issuance of notice itself.
16.
Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed-of. ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J APRIL 6, 2026 V.Rawat W.P.(CRL) 1088/2026 Page 4 of 4 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.