Disposed

Ridhi Kale v. State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Delhi HC6 May 2025W.P.(CRL)/1499/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought directions to complete stalled investigation into FIR No. 22/2023 under Sections 500/509 IPC and Section 67 IT Act, where no chargesheet had been filed for two years and the accused was claimed untraceable. Court found the State's explanation inadequate, directed DCP-supervised expeditious investigation, permitted the pending Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. application, and left remedies

What the court decided

AI extract

Ridhi Kale Vs State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~74

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(CRL) 1499/2025

¶4

RIDHI KALE

¶5

.....Petitioner

¶6

Through: Mr. Keshav Sehgal, Mr. Shivam Gaur, Mr. Kshitij Joshi, Mr. Aryan Kumar, Ms. Nandita Sharma, Advocates

¶7

versus

¶8

STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjeev Bhandari, ASC for the State with Mr. Arjit Sharma, Mr. Nikunj Bindal, Advocates along with SI Manzoor Alam, PS Cyber, South East

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

% 06.05.2025

¶12

Issue notice. Mr. Sanjeev Bhandari, ASC for the State accepts notice. In light of the relief sought, no reply is deemed necessary and with the consent of the parties, the matter is heard at the stage of admission.

¶13

The present petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950 read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeks to direct the Respondents to conduct investigation in FIR No. 22/2023 dated 17^th May, 2023 registered under Sections 500/509 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

¶14

Page 1 of 3

¶15

W.P.(CRL) 1499/2025

¶16

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 02/07/2025 at 01:17:10

¶17

Despite passing of two years, the investigation is still not completed and the chargesheet has not been filed. Aggrieved thereby, the Petitioner filed an application under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, South-East District, Saket Courts, New Delhi in Misc Criminal No. 46886/2024.¹ In the status report filed before the Trial Court, it was stated that the accused was not traceable and accordingly the Investigating Officer sought further time to conclude the investigation.

¶18

Mr. Keshav Sehgal, counsel for the Petitioner states that the accused is indeed traceable as is evident from order dated 28^th March, 2025 in CT NO. 30822/2019² wherein the accused is stated to be regularly appearing before the Court.

¶19

Upon being queried by the Court, Mr. Sanjeev Bhandari, ASC for the State, acknowledges that the chargesheet has not been filed. However, he submits that certain information was sought from Google LLC due to which there was a delay in filing the chargesheet.

¶20

It is evident from the record that the FIR in question was registered nearly two years ago, yet no chargesheet has been filed till date. The explanation offered by the State, that certain information was awaited from Google LLC, does not adequately justify the prolonged delay, especially in light of the Petitioner’s assertion, that the accused is regularly appearing in other legal proceedings and is not untraceable as claimed by the Investigating Officer.

¶21

In light of the above, the present petition is disposed of with the following directions:

¶22

1 titled as State v. Ridhi Kale

¶23

2 titled as Dhyan Foundation v. Satpal Dahiya

¶24

Page 2 of 3

¶25

W.P.(CRL) 1499/2025

¶26

¶27

7.1. The investigation in the FIR No. 22/2023 shall be carried out without further delay. Such investigation shall be supervised by the concerned DCP. 7.2. The Petitioner shall be at liberty to seek pursue the pending application under Section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C, if so warranted.

¶28

It is clarified that in the event the investigation is not completed within a period of three months from today, the Petitioner shall be at liberty to take recourse to remedies available in law.

¶29

Disposed of.

¶30

The Court has not examined the merits of the case and all rights and contentions of the parties are left open.

¶31

SANJEEV NARULA, J

¶32

MAY 6, 2025/ab

¶33

Page 3 of 3

¶34

W.P.(CRL) 1499/2025

¶35

This is a digitally signed order.

¶36

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 02/07/2025 at 01:17:10

Ridhi Kale v. State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Ridhi Kale v. State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Minor S Thr Father v Vs State NCT Ofdelhi and Anr.

Nisha Khan @ Nazma Vs State (Govt. NCT of Delhi) & Ors.

Imran Alias Murgi Chor Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Sanchal Ranjan Vs State of Delhi NCT & Ors.

Sanofi India Limited & Anr. Vs Union of India

Tushar Kakkar & Ors. Vs the State (Govt.of N.C.T.) & Anr.

Aman @Sonu Vs State NCT of Delhi

Om Pal Singh Tomar Vs the State(Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Ors.

Ravinder Kaur Chadha Vs the State (the Govt. of N.C.T.of Delhi) & Anr.

Satish Kumar Sethi & Anr. Vs Central Bureau of Investigation (Cbi) & Anr.

Pradeep Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Abhishek Verma Alias Ponu Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Sh. Rajender@ Raju Goenka Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Kassim Foffana Vs State of NCT of Delhi