Ved Prakash v. Sanjay Arora, Commissioner Of Police And ORS

$~25 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CONT.CAS(C) 643/2025 VED PRAKASH .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Piyush Kr. Singh and Ms. Renu, Advocates.

versus SANJAY ARORA, COMMISSIONER OF POLICE AND ORS .....Respondents Through:

Mr. Niraj Kumar, Sr. Central Govt.

Counsel with Mr. Chaitanya Kumar, Advocate and Mr. Rahul Dhama, SI P.S. IP Estate.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA

O R D E R

% 26.11.2025 1.

This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. 2.

The present petition under Sections 2(b)/12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 seeks the following prayers:

"I.

Initiate Contempt proceedings against the Contemnors and Punish them for wilful disobedience of the Order dated 07.02.2018 passed by the Hon'ble High Court in WPC No. 7608/2017. II.

Pass an order directing the Contemnors to comply in letter and spirit the directions contained in the order dated 07.02.2018 passed by the Hon'ble Court in WP (C) 7608/2017 titled as AMANDEEP SINGH JOHAR versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

III. Pass an order directing the respondents to give a point wise/parawise reply on the issue of compliance of the directions The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

given by this Hon'ble court in AMANDEEP SINGH JOHAR versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

IV. Pass an order imposing exemplary costs on the contemnors for willfully and deliberately not complying with the directions passed by Hon'ble Court.

V. Pass an order directing respondents to not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner for filing the present petition. VI. Pass any such directions or order that this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the abovementioned case." 3.

The grievance of the petitioner is that Head Constable-Krishan Sharma (respondent No. 4) on 20.04.2025 had visited his shop and informed his son that a complaint has been registered against the petitioner and had directed him to join the enquiry for the purpose of verification of a complaint made by Ms. 'H' against him. Thereafter, on 21.04.2025, respondent No.4 had again visited the petitioner's shop and asked him to report at the police station (chauki). It is pointed out that after issuing the contempt notice dated 21.04.2025, the respondents have registered a FIR No. 197/2025 dated 25.04.2025, under Sections 79/351(3)/3(5) of the BNS, 2023, at P.S. I.P. Estate, and thereafter, notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS was issued to the petitioner. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the aforesaid FIR was registered after the aforesaid contempt notice was served by the petitioner. 4.

Status report dated 06.08.2025 on behalf of the respondents has been placed on record, wherein, it has been stated that on the basis of the complaint of one Ms. "H", an enquiry was conducted and during the said enquiry, the petitioner was contacted. It is further recorded therein that subsequently, the aforesaid FIR was recorded on the basis of complaint made by Ms. H as well The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

as her statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS before the learned JMFC, Tis Hazari and thereafter, notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS was issued to the petitioner.

5.

In these circumstances, no directions in the present petition for initiation of contempt proceedings are called for. 6.

Needless to state that the petitioner will be at liberty to initiate appropriate steps in accordance with law with respect to the grievance of registration of FIR before the Court of competent jurisdiction. 7.

The petition is disposed of accordingly.

8.

Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. AMIT SHARMA, J NOVEMBER 26, 2025/bsr/ns The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.