Disposed

State v. Anuradha Alias Chiku

Delhi HC4 Nov 2025CRL.M.C./6835/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Two State petitions sought setting aside of ASJ-II/Special Judge (NDPS) orders of 12.09.2025 and 19.09.2025 relating to FIR No. 186/2025 PS Sultanpuri, along with transfer of proceedings to the MCOCA court. With prayers B and C rendered infructuous or withdrawn, the High Court set aside the impugned orders and disposed of both petitions.

What did the court decide?

Orders dated 12.09.2025 and 19.09.2025 of ASJ-II/Special Judge (NDPS) in FIR No. 186/2025 set aside; observations therein declared non-binding; petitions disposed of.

State Vs Anuradha Alias Chiku — Narcotics (NDPS) | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~40, 41

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 6835/2025, CRL.M.A. 28759/2025 STATE .....Petitioner

¶4

Through: Mr. Aman Usman, APP for State.

¶5

versus ANURADHA ALIAS CHIKU .....Respondent Through: Mr. Kundan Kumar, Advocate.

¶6

- CRL.M.C. 6836/2025, CRL.M.A. 28761/2025 STATE .....Petitioner

¶7

Through: Mr. Aman Usman, APP for State. versus DEEPA SINGH .....Respondent Through: Mr. Kundan Kumar, Advocate. CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

¶9

O R D E R

¶10

% 04.11.2025

¶11

The reliefs sought in both the petitions are identical but for the sake of

¶12

convenience, they are reproduced as under:

¶13

CRL.M.C. 6835/2025	CRL.M.C. 6836/2025
A. Set aside/quash the impugned orders dated	A. Set aside/quash the impugned orders
12.09.2025 and 19.09.2025 passed by the Ld.	dated 12.09.2025 and 19.09.2025 passed by
ASJ-II/Special Judge (NDPS), North- West,	the Ld. ASJ-II/Special Judge (NDPS),
Rohini Courts, Delhi in FIR No. 186/2025 PS	North- West, Rohini Courts, Delhi in FIR
Sultanpuri;	No. 186/2025 PS Sultanpuri;
B. Direct the Special Judge NDPS to transfer	B. Direct the Special Judge NDPS to
the proceedings qua the FIR No. 186/2025,	transfer the proceedings qua the FIR No.
U/s 21/22/25/29 NDPS Act/ 238 BNS, 18C	186/2025, U/s 21/22/25/29 NDPS Act/ 238
Drugs and Cosmetic Act, and section 3 and 4	BNS, 18C Drugs and Cosmetic Act, and
MCOCA, PS Sultanpuri, to the designated	section 3 and 4 MCOCA, PS Sultanpuri, to

¶14

This is a digitally signed order.

¶15

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 06/11/2025 at 14:34:35

¶16

court under MCOCA, North West District, the designated court under MCOCA, North Rohini Court; West District, Rohini Court; C. Direct the designated Court MCOCA to C. Direct the designated Court MCOCA to decide the application of police custody, decide the application of police custody, afresh without prejudice to the orders passed afresh without prejudice to the orders by the Ld. Special Judge NDPS/ NW; passed by the Ld. Special Judge NDPS/ D. Pass any other order as this Hon’ble Court NW; may deem fit and proper in the facts and D. Pass any other order as this Hon’ble circumstances of the case. Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶17

Counsel for the Respondent, on instructions, states that prayer ‘A’ has been rendered infructuous as the second bail applications have been rejected by orders dated 31^st October, 2025 passed by ASJ-03, North-West, Rohini Courts, Delhi. Accordingly, he has no objection to the said prayer being allowed.

¶18

Having regard to the facts narrated in the petitions and the submissions made by the counsel for the Respondents, prayer ‘A’ is allowed and the orders dated 12^th September, 2025 and 19^th September, 2025 passed by ASJ-II/Special Judge (NDPS), North-West, Rohini Courts, Delhi, in FIR No. 186/2025 registered at P.S. Sultanpuri, are hereby set aside.

¶19

Mr. Aman Usman, APP for State, submits that he is not pressing prayer ‘B’, as the designated MCOCA Court has already exercised jurisdiction with respect to the proposals and offences added during the course of investigation. Accordingly, prayer ‘B’ is not pressed.

¶20

Likewise, he states that prayer ‘C’ has also been rendered infructuous since the request for police custody has already been considered and granted by the MCOCA Court.

¶21

In light of the above development, no further directions are required to be passed. Needless to state, as the impugned orders have been set aside, any observations contained therein shall not be treated as binding.

¶22

This is a digitally signed order.

¶23

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 06/11/2025 at 14:34:35

¶24

Accordingly, the petitions are disposed of along with pending applications.

¶25

SANJEEV NARULA, J

¶26

NOVEMBER 4, 2025 nk

¶27

This is a digitally signed order.

¶28

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 06/11/2025 at 14:34:35

State v. Anuradha Alias Chiku

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State v. Anuradha Alias Chiku

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mayank Agarwal Vs State (Gnct of Delhi) & Anr.

Rishu @ Abhimanyu @ Sandeep Vs State NCT of Delhi

Manikant Lawania Vs Asuja Eserv Private Limited

Mangal Pandey Vs State of NCT of Delhi

State Vs Deepa Singh

Vijay @Nauty Vs State NCT of Delhi