Disposed¶9

Ravinder Singh v. Union of India & Anr.

Delhi HC3 Sept 2025W.P.(C)/13513/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Passport issued concealing pendency of criminal case/s; inaction against accused Nikhil Anand; petitioner-victim Ravinder Singh; representation to UOI; third-party version to be considered; action preferably within two months; petition disposed; Delhi High Court; 03.09.2025; W.P.(C) 13513/2025.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of with directions to the respondents (Union of India & Anr.) to treat it as a representation, take an appropriate decision on the petitioner's prayer while factoring in the third-party's version as warranted, and act/take further steps expeditiously, preferably within two months. ¶9

Ravinder Singh Vs Union of India & Anr. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶9

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents (Union of India & Anr.) failed to take action against Mr. Nikhil Anand, who secured a passport by concealing material information regarding pendency of criminal case/s against him.

¶3

Court's answer

After some hearing, the petition was disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the present petition as a representation and take an appropriate decision with respect to the prayer canvassed by the petitioner.

¶6

Ratio / Principle

In acting upon that representation, the respondents were directed to also take into account the version of the concerned third-party against whom the petition is directed, as may be warranted.

¶7

Key takeaways

The respondents were to take appropriate action and/or further steps expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two months.ratio¶8

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi HC — W.P.(C) 13513/2025 (Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sachin Datta) — Order dated 03.09.2025 — Ravinder Singh v. Union of India & Anr. Petitioner, claiming to be a victim of the alleged action/s of one Mr. Nikhil Anand (accused in certain criminal cases / FIR, inter alia those initiated by the petitioner), was aggrieved by the respondents' inaction in failing to take action against Anand, who had secured a passport by concealing material information regarding pendency of criminal case/s against him; petitioner submitted that had such information been disclosed, the passport would not have been issued. No statute or precedent was cited. After some hearing, the petition was disposed of: respondents directed to consider it as a representation and take an appropriate decision with respect to the prayer canvassed, taking into account (as warranted) the version of the concerned third-party against whom the petition is directed, and to take appropriate action and/or further steps expeditiously as possible, preferably within two months. CM APPL.55461/2025 (Exemption): allowed subject to all just exceptions; application disposed of.

¶1

$~128

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 13513/2025 RAVINDER SINGH .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Vignaraj Pasayat, Adv.

¶4

versus

¶5

UNION OF INDIA & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Amit Tiwari, CGSC, Ms. Ayushi Srivastava, Mr. Ayush Tanwar and Mr. Arpan Narwal, Advs., UOI.

¶6

CORAM:

¶7

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA

¶8

O R D E R

¶9

% 03.09.2025

¶10

CM APPL.55461/2025 (Exemption)

¶11

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶12

Application stands disposed of.

¶13

W.P.(C) 13513/2025

¶14

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner, being aggrieved by the inaction of the respondents in failing to take action against one Mr. Nikhil Anand, who has secured a passport by concealing material information regarding pendency of criminal case/s against him.

¶15

It is submitted that, had such information been disclosed, the said passport would not have been issued.

¶16

The petitioner claims to be a victim of the alleged action/s of Mr. Nikhil Anand, who is an accused in certain criminal cases / FIR, inter - alia , those initiated by the petitioner.

¶17

After some hearing, the present petition is disposed of with a direction

¶18

This is a digitally signed order.

¶19

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 09/09/2025 at 12:23:30

¶20

to the respondents to consider the present petition as a representation and take an appropriate decision with respect to the prayer canvassed by the petitioner.

¶21

Needless to say, the respondents shall also take into account the version of the concerned third-party (as may be warranted) against whom the present petition is directed.

¶22

Let the respondents take appropriate action and / or take further steps as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two months from today.

¶23

The petition is disposed of in the above terms.

¶24

SACHIN DATTA, J

¶25

SEPTEMBER 3, 2025/ cl

¶26

This is a digitally signed order.

¶27

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 09/09/2025 at 12:23:30

Ravinder Singh v. Union of India & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravinder Singh v. Union of India & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Durga Shiva Kumar & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Vutla Subbarao Vs the Commissioner Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan & Ors.

Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan Vs Madan Lal Paneri

Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan Vs Ms.Radhika Joshi

M/S Jindal Charitable Society Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 29 & Anr.

M/S Twenty Four Secure Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Mohd Asad Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Sh. Vinod Kumar Garg Vs Union of India & Ors.

Mahesh Rajput & Anr. Vs National Commission for Scheduled Tribes and Ors.

Anjuman Ghulam E Mustafa through Its President Tilat Ahmed Vs Deputy Commissioner of Police South Delhi New Delhi & Anr.

Parksmart Technologies Private Limited Vs Union of India

Nice (Society) Trust Vs Directorate of Enforcement

Ms 7 Steps Consultores Pvt. Ltd. Vs Telecommunications Consultants India Ltd. & Anr.

Sh. Vinod Kumar Garg Vs Union of India & Ors.