Gurpreet Singh @ Sahib Singh v. State of N.C.T. of Delhi & Anr.

Delhi HC6 May 2026W.P.(CRL)/1454/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of FIR; Article 226; Section 528 BNSS; Sections 74, 79, 126, 351(3) BNS; premature/writ interference refused; investigation at final stage; final report within one week; counter-FIR No. 535/2025 PS Indirapuram Ghaziabad; Yashoda Hospital Kaushambi CCTV footage; business dispute between families; PS Anand Vihar Shahdara; W.P.(CRL) 1454/2026 & CRL.M.A. 14004-05/2026; Prateek Jalan, J.; Gurpreet Singh @ Sahib Singh v. State of N.C.T. of Delhi; disposed of with liberty to seek remedies.

What did the court decide?

No substantive relief; petition disposed of at this stage with liberty to the petitioner to avail his remedies in accordance with law before the competent Court once the final report is filed ¶¶36

Gurpreet Singh @ Sahib Singh Vs State of N.C.T. of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Delhi HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No substantive relief; petition disposed of at this stage with liberty to the petitioner to avail his remedies in accordance with law before the competent Court once the final report is filed

¶¶36

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution read with Section 528 BNSS should be exercised to quash FIR No. 226/2025 when the investigation is at its final stage and the final report is about to be filed

¶¶10

Court's answer

It would not be appropriate to exercise the writ jurisdiction of the Court at this stage, since the investigation is at its final stage and the prosecution is in the process of filing the final report

¶¶29

Ratio / Principle

Interference at this stage would entail consideration only of the evidence placed before the Court and would pre-empt a comprehensive consideration by the concerned Court

¶¶29

Key takeaways

The petitioner's submission that the allegations emanate from a business dispute is, at this stage, a speculative submissionratio¶¶34
If the prosecution proceeds against the petitioner, it shall be open to him to seek his remedies before the competent Court on the basis of the entire material collected during investigation; the petition is disposed of at this stage leaving him free to avail remedies as and when the final report is filed and to raise all contentions before the competent Courtratio¶¶36

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Prateek Jalan, J.) disposed of a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution read with Section 528 BNSS seeking quashing of FIR No. 226/2025 dated 07.05.2025 (PS Anand Vihar, Shahdara, Delhi), registered under Sections 74, 79, 126 and 351(3) BNS on the complaint of respondent No. 2 alleging threatening telephone calls, interception of her vehicle and assault on 02.05.2025. Petitioner's counsel urged the FIR was false and born of business disputes, pointing to counter-FIR No. 535/2025 (PS Indirapuram, Ghaziabad) and the petitioner's presence with his injured father at Yashoda Hospital, Kaushambi. The State reported the investigation at its final stage with the final report to be filed within one week, including collected Yashoda Hospital CCTV footage. The Court held it inappropriate to exercise writ jurisdiction at that stage, since interference would pre-empt comprehensive consideration by the concerned Court, termed the business-dispute plea speculative, and disposed of the petition leaving the petitioner free to seek remedies before the competent Court on the entire material collected.

¶1

$~110

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(CRL) 1454/2026 & CRL.M.A. 14004-05/2026

¶4

GURPREET SINGH @ SAHIB SINGH .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Amit Gupta, Mr. Prateek Mehta, Mr. Kshitij Vaibhav & Ms. Megha Mehta, Advocates.

¶5

versus

¶6

STATE OF N.C.T. OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondent Through: Ms. Rupali Bandhopdhya, ASC with Mr. Amit, Advocate. SI Dheer Singh, PS Anand Vihar.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN O R D E R

¶9

% 06.05.2026

¶10

The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 [“BNSS”] seeking quashing of FIR No. 226/2025 dated 07.05.2025, registered at Police Station Anand Vihar, Shahdara, Delhi, under Sections 74, 79, 126, and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 [“BNS”].

¶11

The FIR was registered at the instance of respondent No. 2 herein, and the allegations contained therein may be briefly summarised as follows:

¶12

a) The complainant’s husband and brother-in-law were engaged in a partnership business of event management, with the father and uncle of the present petitioner.

¶13

b) Certain disputes arose in relation to the said business, during which the complainant’s husband raised allegations of financial

¶14

W.P.(CRL) 1454/2026

¶15

Page 1 of 4

¶16

This is a digitally signed order.

¶17

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 11/05/2026 at 13:49:23

¶18

irregularities against the petitioner’s father and uncle.

¶19

c) On 02.05.2025 at about 12:05 a.m., the complainant’s son received five telephone calls from the present petitioner, during which he was abused and he and his family members were threatened. At about 12:29 a.m., the petitioner threatened that he was on his way to eliminate the complainant and her son.

¶20

d) Thereafter, the complainant and her son attempted to contact her husband telephonically; however, as they were unable to reach him, they proceeded by car to a banquet hall in an attempt to locate him.

¶21

e) While the complainant and her son were exiting their locality, the petitioner intercepted their vehicle by blocking its way with his car. He was accompanied by three unknown persons. It is further alleged that he apprehended the complainant’s son and thereafter assaulted the complainant “ by using one hand upon my hair and another hand was put upon my breast and threatened that he is a very dangerous person and would kill my both son and shall commit my rape and thereafter while apprehending me from my hair he then forcefully pulled my chick and asked about my husband and when I transpired to him that yet I have not talked to him and I even do not know aware about the whereabouts of my husband, then Sahib Singh along with his 3 unknown persons left from the spot by stating that, he would kill my husband as and when they would see my husband. ”

¶22

f) Subsequently, the complainant made a PCR call and reported the incident at the police station on 05.05.2025.

¶23

W.P.(CRL) 1454/2026

¶24

Page 2 of 4

¶25

This is a digitally signed order.

¶26

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 11/05/2026 at 13:49:23

¶27

Mr. Amit Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the present complaint is false and has been instituted on account of ongoing business disputes between the families of the petitioner and the complainant. In this regard, he points out that FIR No. 535/2025 was registered on 03.05.2025 at Police Station Indirapuram, Ghaziabad, against the husband of the complainant, at the instance of the petitioners, in connection with injuries sustained by the petitioner’s father in an incident involving the husband and other members of the complainant’s family. He further submits that, in fact, at the time of the alleged incident forming the subject matter of the present FIR, the petitioner was attending to his father, who had sustained injuries in the said occurrence and was undergoing treatment at Yashoda Hospital, Kaushambi, Ghaziabad.

¶28

Ms. Rupali Bandhopadhya, learned Additional Standing Counsel, appearing on behalf of the State, on advance notice, submits that the investigation in the impugned FIR is at its final stage, and the final report shall be filed within one week. She further states that the CCTV footage of the Yashoda Hospital, where the petitioner claims to have been present at the relevant time, has also been collected and shall form part of the final report.

¶29

Having regard to the aforesaid submissions, I am of the view that it would not be appropriate to exercise the writ jurisdiction of this Court at this stage. The investigation is at its final stage and the prosecution is in the process of filing the final report. Interference, at this stage, would entail consideration only of the evidence placed before the Court, and pre-empt a comprehensive consideration by the concerned Court. While Mr. Gupta submits that the allegations against the petitioner emanate

¶30

W.P.(CRL) 1454/2026

¶31

Page 3 of 4

¶32

This is a digitally signed order.

¶33

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 11/05/2026 at 13:49:23

¶34

from a business dispute, that is also at this stage, a speculative submission.

¶35

In the event the prosecution decides to proceed against the petitioner for the offences alleged, it shall be open to the petitioner to seek his remedies in accordance with law before the competent Court, on the basis of the entire material collected during investigation and, if necessary, to avail such further remedies as may be available in law thereafter. This would enable the concerned Court to consider the matter in its entirety, including the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner in the present proceedings, in a comprehensive and holistic manner.

¶36

In view of the aforesaid, the petition, alongwith pending applications, is accordingly disposed of at this stage, leaving it open to the petitioner to avail his remedies in accordance with law, as and when the final report is filed, and to raise all contentions available to him before the competent Court, if so advised.

¶37

PRATEEK JALAN, J

¶38

MAY 6, 2026 ‘pv’/SD/

¶39

W.P.(CRL) 1454/2026

¶40

Page 4 of 4

¶41

This is a digitally signed order.

¶42

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 11/05/2026 at 13:49:23

Gurpreet Singh @ Sahib Singh v. State of N.C.T. of Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gurpreet Singh @ Sahib Singh v. State of N.C.T. of Delhi & 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

Kamini Sharma Vs State NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Shabnam Vs the State of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Sadhna Bhardwaj Vs Dgp Tihar Jail & Ors.

Prachi Agrawal Vs State (Nct of Delhi)

Manisha Prajapat & Anr. Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Monika Sharma Vs Union of India & Ors.

Himanshu Vs the State NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Reena Vs Union of India & Anr.

Shivam Alias Bhola Vs State NCT of Delhi

Kasim Vs State of (Nct of Delhi)

Leena Paulose Vs State NCT of Delhi

Tahir Hussain Vs the State through SHO

Sheikh Hussain Vs State of NCT of Delhi

Devender Nath @ Deepak Mishra Vs State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.