$~72 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 2228/2026, CRL.M.A. 22249/2026-Stay KUSH JAIN .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Avadh Bihari Kaushik, Mr. Rishabh Kumar, Mr. Kartik Sharma, Advocates versus THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) AND ORS. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Rupali Bandopadhya, ASC for the State with SI Mukesh Yadav, PS: Punjabi Bagh CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE O R D E R % 28.07.2026 1. By virtue of the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), the petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No.300/2026 dated 14.06.2026 registered at PS.: Punjabi Bagh, Delhi under Sections 85/316(2)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and all proceedings emanating therefrom qua him. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a citizen of Netherlands who has been maliciously roped in the present FIR by the complainant solely with a view to harass him, and that the complainant had never levelled any allegations against the petitioner either in the earlier police complaint lodged in the year 2024 or in the Domestic Violence complaint made in the year 2025. He submits that the complainant has once again got the present FIR registered after failing to 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 31/07/2026 at 14:12:13 obtain any favourable relief(s) in the earlier proceedings. 3. Thereafter, placing reliance upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana & Ors. vs. Bhajan Lal & Ors.:1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, particularly, paragraph 102 thereof, learned counsel submits that the present case squarely falls within categories (5) and (7), wherein the inherent jurisdiction of this Court can be exercised for quashing of FIR/ criminal proceedings, which reads as under:- “(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. (7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.” 4. Lastly, learned counsel submits that though the allegations against the petitioner in the FIR pertain to the period from 2018 to 2023, it has only been registered in the year 2026, there is therefore an unexplainable delay in lodging the present FIR. 5. To buttress the aforesaid contentions, learned counsel relies upon the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Dr. Sushil Kumar Purbey & Anr. Vs. State of Bihar & Ors.:2026 SCC OnLine SC 338; Charu Shukla Vs. State of UP & Ors.:2026 SCC OnLine SC 476. 6. Per contra, learned ASC submits that the FIR contains specific allegations against the petitioner regarding acts of molestation, which requires to be investigated. She further, upon instructions from the 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 31/07/2026 at 14:12:13 Investigating Officer, submits that till date since no notice under Section 35(3) BNSS has been issued to the petitioner requiring him to join the investigation and as such, the present petition is premature and is liable to be dismissed. 7. Lastly, qua delay in registration of the FIR, learned ASC has shown this Court the statement of the complainant, wherein she has stated that she had to remain silent for all these years in order to save her marriage and to prevent her specially-abled daughter from being sent to an NGO, as she was being pressurised by her husband and parents-in-law. 8. Considering the nature of allegations made in the present FIR, which has only been registered recently on 14.06.2026, and the role of the applicant is still under investigation and, admittedly, no notice under Section 35(3) BNSS has been issued to him to participate in the investigation, this Court is of the considered opinion that the present petition is too premature so as to exercise the inherent powers to quash the present FIR. 9. Insofar as reliance placed on Bhajan Lal (supra) by learned counsel for the petitioner, considering the stage of the present proceedings, the same does not advance the petitioner’s case. Similarly, reliance on Dr. Sushil Kumar Purbey (supra), Charu Shukla (supra) also does not come to the aid of the petitioner at this stage. 10. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed in limine. SAURABH BANERJEE, J JULY 28, 2026/So 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 31/07/2026 at 14:12:13