Mohit v. Commissioner Of Police

$~11 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 1801/2026 MOHIT .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Pankaj Sinha with Ms. Garima and Mr. Sunil Tiwari, Advocates.

(M): 7210067910 versus COMMISSIONER OF POLICE .....Respondent Through:

Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel (Crl) with Mr. Abhinav Kumar Arya and Mr. Aryan Sachdeva, Advocates for State.

(M): 9818166089 Email: dhcprosecutiondelhipolice@gmail.com Inspector Balram, PS Subhash Palace.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

O R D E R

% 24.06.2026 1.

The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ("BNSS"), seeking issuance of writ of Habeas Corpus with direction for tracing, recovering and producing before this Court, the petitioner's wife, namely Muskan, aged about 21 years and their minor son. 2.

A Status Report has been handed over on behalf of the Government of NCT of Delhi, filed on behalf of Station House Officer ('SHO'), Police Station Subhash Place, Delhi. The same is taken on record. 3.

As per the said Status Report, the wife of the petitioner along with the minor child, is staying at her parents' house in Muzaffarpur, Bihar. 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 29/06/2026 at 12:27:28

4.

Muskan along with her minor child has appeared before this Court through the Video Conferencing ('VC').

5.

This Court has interacted with Muskan, the wife of the petitioner. She has clearly stated that she has gone to the house of her parents, out of her own will and volition. She submits that her husband, i.e., the petitioner, used to beat her up and behaved aggressively with her. She has further stated before this Court that she was not allowed to visit her parents house and was stopped by her husband.

6.

She submits that she and her child are happy with her parents. 7.

The aforesaid statement is taken note of.

8.

At this stage, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the statements made by the wife of the petitioner may have been made under fear and coercion.

9.

However, having interacted with the petitioner's wife and having seen the demeanour of the wife of the petitioner, this Court is of the view that she does not seem under any kind of pressure or coercion. 10.

In view of the aforesaid, no further orders are required to be passed in the present petition.

11.

The present petition is accordingly disposed of. MINI PUSHKARNA, J (VACATION JUDGE) VINOD KUMAR, J (VACATION JUDGE) JUNE 24, 2026 c 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 29/06/2026 at 12:27:28