Dismissed

Joginder Singh Kaundal v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) and Anr.

Delhi HC17 Apr 2026W.P.(CRL)/1225/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought quashing of a police 'Notice to Join Enquiry' concerning a property dispute he called purely civil. The IO undertook to conclude the enquiry within four weeks, questioning the petitioner once. Satisfied, the petitioner withdrew the petition, which was dismissed as withdrawn with the IO directed to adhere to that undertaking.

What the court decided

AI extract

Joginder Singh Kaundal Vs State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) and… — Quashing and FIR | Delhi HC (2026)

¶1

$~67

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(CRL) 1225/2026, CRL.M.A. 11783/2026 & 11784/2026

¶4

JOGINDER SINGH KAUNDAL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Prakhar Bhatnagar, Mr. Akram Pasha and Mr. Mohit Tyagi, Advocates.

¶5

versus

¶6

STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) AND ANR

¶7

.....Respondents Through: Mr. Rahul Tyagi, ASC with IO/ASI Kapil.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

¶10

O R D E R % 17.04.2026

¶11

For ready reference, the prayer clause of this writ petition is extracted below:

¶12

“a) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari, thereby quashing and setting aside the impugned "Notice to Join Enquiry" dated 28.11.2025 bearing Complaint No. 1898/SHO/PS Ranhola, Delhi, issued by the officials of Police Station Ran hola, Outer District, Delhi, being wholly illegal, without jurisdiction and contrary to the provisions of law.

¶13

b) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus, thereby directing the Respondent No.1 not to take any coercive steps against the Petitioner pursuant to or in furtherance of the impugned notice or the alleged complaint, including repeated summoning of the Petitioner or any

¶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 20/04/2026 at 14:12:04

¶16

interference with his peaceful possession of the subject property;

¶17

c) Direct the senior officials of the Respondent No.1 to conduct a disciplinary inquiry against the erring police officer who attempted to create a fabricated evidence by pasting the impugned notice on the walls of Petitioner's house, clicking it's picture and removing the pasted impugned notice immediately thereafter.

¶18

d) Direct the Respondent No. 1 to stop calling the Petitioner to the police station for the so called enquiry and close the enquiry as the so called disputes between Respondent No. 2 and the Petitioner are purely of civil nature.

¶19

e) Pass any other or further order(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case, in the interest of justice”.

¶20

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that in the complaint lodged way back in November 2025, till date the enquiry prior to registration of FIR is continuing for which the petitioner is being repeatedly called by the IO. It is further submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that what is simply a civil dispute is being given colour of criminality, that too despite the fact that the complainant has not initiated any civil suit.

¶21

Learned ASC appearing with IO/ASI Kapil accepts notice.

¶22

The IO has shown me the enquiry file including the complaint on which the petitioner is being repeatedly called. Keeping in mind the stage, it would not be appropriate for this court to comment as to whether any cognizable offence is made out.

¶23

However, learned ASC on instructions of IO submits that they shall conclude the enquiry proceedings within four weeks during which they would question the petitioner once after directing him to produce specific documents.

¶24

This is a digitally signed order.

¶25

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 20/04/2026 at 14:12:04

¶26

Learned counsel for petitioner on instructions of his client submits that the petitioner is satisfied with the above said statement of learned ASC and therefore, seeks permission to withdraw this petition.

¶27

Accordingly, the petition and the accompanying applications are dismissed as withdrawn with the directions that the IO shall adhere to his above submission.

¶28

GIRISH KATHPALIA, J

¶29

APRIL 17, 2026/ ry

¶30

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 20/04/2026 at 14:12:04

Joginder Singh Kaundal v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Joginder Singh Kaundal v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Teli Tangum Camdir Vs State NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Mohamed Mohamed Eliwa Ghonim Shalaby Vs Deputy Commissioner of Police & Ors.

Kapoori Bai Vs State (Nct of Delhi) & Ors.

Mohammad Sagir Vs Commissioner of Police and Ors.

Ram Kripal Vs State (Nct of Delhi)

Ms Tooba Hannan Vs State of NCT of Delhi and Others & Anr.

Krishan Kumar Malik Vs State (Nct of Delhi)

Disha Verma and Anr. Vs State of NCT of Delhi through SHO & Ors.

Mehboob Hassan Vs State Govt of NCT of Delhi

Mr. Sunil Malhotra & Ors. Vs State, NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Mustafa Vs the State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.

Sh Harish Arora Vs Directorate of Enforcement and Ors.

Mamraj Vs State (Nct of Delhi)