Disposed¶17

Baldev Raj and Anr. v. State of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Delhi HC17 Nov 2025W.P.(CRL)/3774/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of FIR — BNS 2023 Sections 318(2)/340(1)/340(2)/61(2)/3(5) — FIR No. 0554/2025, P.S. Subhash Place — Agreement to Sell 27.04.2025, Ambala — purely civil dispute / false implication — territorial jurisdiction objection — pre-arrest bail — specimen signatures before IO — appearance 26.11.2025 — petition withdrawn with liberty to seek remedies post-investigation — disposed with pending application — Sanjeev Narula, J — decided 17.11.2025.

What did the court decide?

Petition withdrawn with leave and liberty to avail appropriate remedies at the relevant stage after conclusion of the investigation; disposed of along with pending application. ¶17

Baldev Raj and Anr. Vs State of NCT of Delhi and Anr. — Cheating and Forgery | Delhi HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition withdrawn with leave and liberty to avail appropriate remedies at the relevant stage after conclusion of the investigation; disposed of along with pending application.

¶17

Issue for consideration

Whether FIR No. 0554/2025 ought to be quashed on the ground that the Petitioners were falsely implicated in what is a purely civil contractual dispute arising out of the Agreement to Sell dated 27.04.2025, which Respondent No. 2 allegedly converted into criminal proceedings to exert pressure. +1 more

¶11

Ratio / Principle

On the State's submission and counsel's statement that the Petitioners would appear before the IO (from 26.11.2025 or the week thereafter), the Court granted the Petitioners leave to withdraw the petition with liberty to avail appropriate remedies at the relevant stage after conclusion of the investigation, and disposed of the petition along with the pending application. No ruling was made on the merits of quashing or territorial jurisdiction.

¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

W.P.(CRL) 3774/2025, High Court of Delhi (Sanjeev Narula, J.), disposed of as withdrawn on 17.11.2025. Petition sought quashing of FIR No. 0554/2025 dated 09.09.2025 under Sections 318(2)/340(1)/340(2)/61(2)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, P.S. Subhash Place. Petitioners pleaded false implication in a purely civil dispute under an Agreement to Sell dated 27.04.2025 between Petitioner No. 1 and Respondent No. 2, with a declaration suit pending before the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Ambala, and absence of Delhi's territorial jurisdiction (agreement executed at Ambala); Petitioner No. 1 already had pre-arrest bail. The State submitted the IO required the Petitioners' presence only for providing specimen signatures. Counsel stated the Petitioners would appear before the IO on 26.11.2025 or in the week thereafter and sought withdrawal; leave and liberty to avail appropriate remedies after conclusion of the investigation were granted, and the petition was disposed of along with the pending application.

¶1

$~74

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(CRL) 3774/2025, CRL.M.A. 34056/2025

¶4

BALDEV RAJ AND ANR. .....Petitioners

¶5

Through: Ms. Puja Chopra, Senior Advocate with Mr. Tapish Gupta, Advocate.

¶6

versus

¶7

STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Yasir Rauf Ansari, ASC for State with Mr. Alok Sharma, Advocate with SI Neeraj Kr., PS-Subhash Place.

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

¶9

O R D E R

¶10

% 17.11.2025 1. This petition seeks quashing of FIR No. 0554/2025 dated 09^th September, 2025 under Section 318(2)/340(1)/340(2)/61(2)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 registered at P.S. Subhash Place.

¶11

Ms. Puja Chopra, Senior Counsel for the Petitioners, submits that the Petitioners have been falsely implicated and that the dispute is purely civil in nature arising out of an Agreement to Sell dated 27^th April, 2025 executed between Petitioner No. 1 and Respondent No. 2. The Petitioners have already instituted a civil suit before the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Ambala seeking a declaration that the agreement is invalid. It is argued that Respondent No. 2 cannot convert a contractual dispute into criminal proceedings or use the criminal process to exert pressure on the Petitioners.

¶12

This is a digitally signed order.

¶13

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 19/11/2025 at 15:01:29

¶14

Ms. Chopra further submits that no part of the alleged offence occurred within the territorial jurisdiction of Delhi, as the agreement was executed in Ambala. Since the matter is still under investigation, it is urged that the State may examine these aspects and the Petitioner No. 1, who is already protected by pre-arrest bail, may not be unnecessarily harassed.

¶15

Mr. Yasir Rauf Ansari, ASC for the State, submits that Petitioners’ presence by the Investigating Officer¹ is presently required only for providing specimen signatures, and that they will not be unnecessarily summoned thereafter.

¶16

In view of the above, Ms. Chopra states that the Petitioners shall appear before the IO on 26^th November, 2025 or in the week thereafter coordinating the date and time with the IO. She seeks leave to withdraw the present petition with liberty to avail appropriate remedies at the relevant stage after conclusion of the investigation. Leave and liberty are granted as prayed for.

¶17

Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of along with pending application.

¶18

SANJEEV NARULA, J

¶19

NOVEMBER 17, 2025/ nk

¶20

1 “IO”

¶21

This is a digitally signed order.

¶22

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 19/11/2025 at 15:01:29

Baldev Raj and Anr. v. State of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Baldev Raj and Anr. v. State of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

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

Simran Thaper Vs State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Riyazuddin Vs State (Nct of Delhi) & Ors.

Mohit Shivnarayan Goyal & Ors. Vs the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Rakesh Singh & Ors. Vs State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Manoj Sharma Vs the State (Nct of Delhi)

Anoop Kumar Vs State Gnct of Delhi

Rahul Dev Vs State Gnct of Delhi

Aman & Anr. Vs the State of N.C.T of Delhi & Anr.

Rajinder Singh Dagar Vs Devta Enterprises & Anr.

Manpreet Singh and Ors. Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Riyazuddin Vs State (Nct of Delhi) & Ors.

Dr Bhim Rao Ambedkar Samaj Kalyan Samiti Vs the State NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Sachin Kumar Vs State NCT of Delhi

Resham Singh Vs State of NCT of Delhi