Petitioner sought reassignment of his complaint, independent treatment from an earlier FIR, and action against the accused. The court held that since the complaint was still under investigation, he could seek directions from the Magistrate under Sections 173/175 BNSS if aggrieved by non-registration of a separate FIR.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~107
PRADEEP SINGHAL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Dhananjai Jain, Advocate.
versus
GOVT OF NCT DELHI AND ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Amol Sinha, ASC with Insp. Nikesh Kumar, PS: EOW.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA O R D E R % 18.07.2024
1. Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution on India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 („Cr.P.C.‟) has been preferred on behalf of the petitioner with the following prayers :
“ a) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction directing the reassignment of the Petitioner’s complaint to a different Investigating Officer and ensure that the complaint dt. 25/05/2024 is treated independently from FIR no. 0061/2021 dt.13/04/2021 P.S. Economic offence wing.
b) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction directing the Respondents to take immediate legal action against the accused as per the complaint lodged by the Petitioner. ”
2. Learned ASC for the State (respondent No. 1 and 2) appears on advance notice and accepts notice.
3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that complaint submitted by petitioner has been wrongly clubbed with an earlier FIR, which already stands
This is a digitally signed order. 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 04/07/2025 at 04:06:40
registered. He further contends that present complaint constitutes a separate cause of action, and the same could not have been clubbed with an earlier complaint.
4. Learned ASC for the State opposes the petition and submits that if the petitioner is aggrieved against non-registration of FIR, he may initiate proceedings under sub-section (4) of Section 173 read with sub-section 3 of Section 175 of BNSS, seeking appropriate directions from learned MM. It is further informed that the complaint is still being looked into by the investigating agency.
5. The matter is still under consideration of investigating agency. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, petitioner is at liberty to proceed in accordance with law under Sections 173/175 of BNSS, in case, he is aggrieved against the non-registration of a separate FIR. No further directions are called for at this stage.
Petition is accordingly disposed of. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, J.
JULY 18, 2024/ R
This is a digitally signed order. 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 04/07/2025 at 04:06:40
2 issues framed by the court
Should the petitioner's complaint be reassigned to a different Investigating Officer and treated independently from FIR no. 0061/2021?
Is the petitioner entitled to a direction for immediate legal action on his complaint?
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Pradeep Singhal
Govt of NCT Delhi
Others
Anoop Kumar Mendiratta
As recorded by the court registry
A constitutional writ petition in a criminal context, most commonly habeas corpus or a challenge to an FIR or detention order.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
