Disposed¶22

Vikash Kumar & Ors. v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr. & Ors.

Delhi HC14 Oct 2025W.P.(CRL)/2233/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

W.P.(CRL) 2233/2025 & CRL.M.A. 20761/2025; Vikash Kumar v. State of NCT of Delhi; Delhi High Court; Sanjeev Narula J.; quashing of FIR after framing of charges; Article 226 Constitution of India; Section 482 CrPC; Section 528 BNSS 2023; FIR No. 260/2024 dated 15.07.2024 P.S. Vijay Vihar; Sections 376, 323, 509, 506 IPC; ASJ (FTC) North-West District Rohini Courts; mini-trial; sterling and unimpeachable quality; discharge or revision remedy; charge-sheet filed cognizance taken charges framed; petition disposed 14.10.2025; rights left open before Trial Court.

What did the court decide?

No relief granted; petition disposed of without quashing the FIR, with clarification that no opinion was expressed on the merits and all rights and contentions are left open before the Trial Court. ¶22

Vikash Kumar & Ors. Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr… — Writ and Judicial Review | Delhi HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief granted; petition disposed of without quashing the FIR, with clarification that no opinion was expressed on the merits and all rights and contentions are left open before the Trial Court.

¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition under Article 226 seeking quashing of FIR No. 260/2024 (Sections 376, 323, 509, 506 IPC, P.S. Vijay Vihar) should be entertained, given that investigation has concluded, a charge-sheet has been filed, cognizance taken and charges framed.

¶11

Court's answer

The power to quash criminal proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution or Section 482 CrPC (corresponding to Section 528 BNSS, 2023) is to be exercised sparingly, in the rarest of cases, and only to prevent abuse of process or to secure the ends of justice.

¶15

Ratio / Principle

Once a charge-sheet has been filed and, more so, after charges are framed, the Court's scope of scrutiny becomes even more limited; it cannot undertake a mini-trial or assess the sufficiency of the evidence, and if the material discloses a prima facie case or even a strong suspicion, the proceedings must be allowed to continue.

¶15

Key takeaways

Quashing may be considered only in exceptional cases where the defence material is of sterling and unimpeachable quality that completely nullifies the prosecution version on its face.ratio¶15
The framing of charges by the Trial Court itself signifies a judicial determination that sufficient grounds exist to proceed against the accused.ratio¶16
Invocation of extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 or inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC cannot serve as a substitute for the statutory remedies of discharge or revision; entertaining a quashing petition after framing of charge would amount to short-circuiting the trial process, and the proper recourse for the petitioner aggrieved by the order framing charges lies in pursuing the appropriate remedy in accordance with law.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Delhi (Sanjeev Narula, J., Order dated 14.10.2025) disposed of a writ petition under Article 226 seeking quashing of FIR No. 260/2024 dated 15.07.2024, P.S. Vijay Vihar (Sections 376, 323, 509, 506 IPC), instituted while investigation was in progress but by the date of order supported by a filed charge-sheet, taken cognizance, summons issued and charges framed. Held: quashing power under Article 226/Section 482 CrPC (corresponding to Section 528 BNSS, 2023) is exercised sparingly, in the rarest of cases, only to prevent abuse of process or secure the ends of justice; after framing of charge the Court cannot undertake a mini-trial or assess evidentiary sufficiency, and quashing is reserved for defence material of sterling and unimpeachable quality that completely nullifies the prosecution version on its face. Framing of charges is itself a judicial determination of sufficient grounds; writ/inherent jurisdiction cannot substitute the statutory remedies of discharge or revision, and entertaining such a petition would short-circuit the trial. Petition disposed of with pending applications; no opinion on merits; rights and contentions left open before the Trial Court (ASJ FTC, North-West District, Rohini Courts).

¶1

$~30

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(CRL) 2233/2025 & CRL.M.A. 20761/2025

¶4

VIKASH KUMAR & ORS. .....Petitioners

¶5

Through: Ms. Medhani Tyagi, Mr. Utsav Kumar, Advocates

¶6

versus

¶7

STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Anand V. Khatri, ASC for the State with Mr. Aditya Khatri, Advocate along with SI Neha Khatri, PS Vijay Vihar

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

¶9

O R D E R

¶10

% 14.10.2025

¶11

The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks quashing of FIR No. 260/2024 dated 15^th July, 2024, registered at P.S. Vijay Vihar, Delhi under Sections 376, 323, 509 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860¹ in which the proceedings are presently pending adjudication before ASJ (FTC), North-West District, Rohini Courts, Delhi. 2. The petition was instituted at a stage when the investigation was still in progress. However, the position has since changed materially, investigation stands concluded, a charge-sheet has been filed, cognizance has been taken, the Petitioner has been summoned, and charges have already been framed.

¶12

1 <IPC=

¶13

This is a digitally signed order.

¶14

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 25/10/2025 at 12:56:48

¶15

The legal position governing the exercise of inherent and extraordinary jurisdiction is well settled. The power to quash criminal proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution or Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973² (corresponding to Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023³ ) is to be exercised sparingly, in the rarest of cases, and only to prevent abuse of process or to secure the ends of justice. The test is whether, on a plain reading of the FIR and the material collected during investigation, the essential ingredients of the alleged offences are altogether absent. Once a charge-sheet has been filed, and more so after charges are framed, the Court’s scope of scrutiny becomes even more limited; it cannot undertake a < mini-trial = or assess the sufficiency of the evidence. If the material on record discloses a prima facie case or even a strong suspicion that the accused has committed the offence, the proceedings must be allowed to continue. Only in exceptional cases where the defence material is of < sterling and unimpeachable quality = that completely nullifies the prosecution version on its face may quashing be considered.

¶16

Applying the above principles, the framing of charges by the Trial Court itself signifies a judicial determination that sufficient grounds exist to proceed against the accused. At this juncture, the invocation of extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution or the inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC cannot serve as a substitute for the statutory remedies of discharge or revision provided under the procedural law. Entertaining a petition for quashing after framing of charge would amount to short-circuiting the trial process and undermining the framework of criminal

¶17

2 <CrPC=

¶18

3 <BNSS=

¶19

This is a digitally signed order.

¶20

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 25/10/2025 at 12:56:48

¶21

adjudication. The proper recourse for the Petitioner, if aggrieved by the order framing charges, lies in pursuing the appropriate remedy in accordance with law.

¶22

In view of the foregoing, this Court finds no ground to exercise its inherent or writ jurisdiction. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of along with pending application(s).

¶23

It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case, and all rights and contentions of the parties are left open to be urged before the Trial Court, in accordance with law.

¶24

SANJEEV NARULA, J

¶25

OCTOBER 14, 2025/ab

¶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 25/10/2025 at 12:56:48

Vikash Kumar & Ors. v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr. & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikash Kumar & Ors. v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr. & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ratan Lal Gupta Vs State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Ors.

Ramesh & Ors. Vs the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Rhrypto Trader Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Ms Ratna Manjusha Garuda Vs Dr. Sridhar Garuda and Ors.

Shubhi Srivastava Advocate Vs Union of India and Ors.

Nazim & Ors. Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Usha Rani Alias Meena Vs State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Umair Siddiqui Vs the Commissioner of Police

Rajeev Sharma Vs Smt. Geeta

Mohd Mateen Vs the State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Mohd Ishrat @ Salman Vs State through SHO & Anr.

Akshay Bhatnagar Vs State of NCT of Delhi

Vimal Kumar & Ors. Vs State of Delhi & Ors.

Vikas Tokas @ Vicky Vs State of NCT of Delhi