Contempt petition alleging non-registration of FIR despite Lalita Kumari directions. Police registered FIR 596/2022 under Sections 420/34 IPC with additional charges later; apology tendered for inadvertent delay. Petition disposed of as compliance achieved.
Petition closed as FIR stood registered; apology accepted.
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.
$~17
REEMA MALIK .....Petitioner
Through:
versus
INSPECTOR MANOJ KUMAR & ORS. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Ashuman, SPC with Mr. Piyush Ahluwalia, Advocates.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL
O R D E R % 02.04.2025
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 07/04/2025 at 12:28:31
465/468/471/419/406/120-B IPC were also added.
ANISH DAYAL, J
APRIL 2, 2025/RK/na
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 07/04/2025 at 12:28:31
1 issue framed by the court
Whether contempt lies for delay in registering an FIR in violation of Lalita Kumari directions.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Lalita Kumari v Govt. of U.P. & Ors.Referred
Lalita Kumari v Govt. of U.P. & Ors., W.P. (Crl) 68 of 2008 (12.11.2013)
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Reema Malik
Inspector Manoj Kumar
Ors.
Anish Dayal
As recorded by the court registry
Proceedings for wilful disobedience of a court order under the Contempt of Courts Act 1971.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
