W.P.(CRL) 2872/2026 $~100 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010441132026 + W.P.(CRL) 2872/2026 & CRL.M.A. 28806/2026 XXXX .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Bipin Kumar Jha, Adv. Petiioner (through VC) versus STATE GOVT. OF NCT DELHI AND ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Anand V. Katri, ASC Insp. Laxmi Singh and SI Mumtaz Bano CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MADHU JAIN O R D E R % 17.09.2026 1. This hearing has been conducted through hybrid mode. 2. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 [hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’], seeking directions to respondent Nos. 1 to 5 to conduct a fair and proper investigation in FIR No. 0009/2026 registered at Women Police Station (North), Subzi Mandi, District North, Delhi, for offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 351(2) and 64(2)(m) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 [hereinafter referred to as ‘BNS’]. The petitioner further seeks disclosure of the action taken against respondent No. 6 and the other persons alleged to be involved. 3. The petitioner is the complainant/victim in the aforesaid FIR, which was registered against respondent No. 6 on the basis of allegations of sexual assault, physical violence and criminal intimidation. Her statement was 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 19/09/2026 at 12:00:15 W.P.(CRL) 2872/2026 recorded before the learned Magistrate on 27.07.2026 and the petitioner thereafter submitted representations to the concerned police authorities between 19.08.2026 and 21.08.2026, alleging that the Investigating Officer [IO] had neither proceeded against the other persons named by her nor informed her of the action taken in the case, including the particulars of the order releasing respondent No. 6. She also relies upon a legal notice issued on behalf of respondent No. 6, received by her on 09.09.2026. It is in these circumstances that the present petition has been filed. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite there being serious allegations of sexual assault, no fair or detailed investigation has been conducted. It is submitted that the FIR was registered in July 2026, yet no effective action has been taken and the petitioner has not been informed of the progress of the investigation or the action taken against the accused persons. It is further submitted that, owing to the casual approach of the IO, respondent No. 6 came to be released. 5. The learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has been harassed by the IO and that, if the investigating agency considered the allegations to be false, it ought to have filed an appropriate cancellation report instead of keeping the investigation pending. 6. Learned ASC for the State submits that respondent No. 6 was not released by the learned Magistrate upon an assessment of the merits of the case. It is submitted that an interim order came to be passed on account of an administrative issue, since the newly constituted Women Police Station had not, at the relevant time, been assigned to any particular Magistrate. 7. Heard both the parties and perused the record. 8. The IO, who is present in Court, states that the charge-sheet has already 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 19/09/2026 at 12:00:15 W.P.(CRL) 2872/2026 been filed. Learned ASC for the state on instructions, states that, during the course of investigation, the petitioner was asked to furnish specific particulars of the hotel where the alleged incident had taken place. However, the petitioner did not furnish the said particulars. It is further stated that a written questionnaire was also given to the petitioner and though she stated that she would submit her response in writing, no response has been furnished by her till date. 9. The petitioner, having failed to furnish the particulars sought by the IO and to respond to the written questionnaire, cannot allege that no proper investigation has been conducted. The record shows that steps were taken during the investigation and that the charge-sheet has also since been filed. 10. In these circumstances, no ground is made out for issuance of any further direction to the investigating agency. The present petition is devoid of any merit. 11. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of. 12. The pending application also stands disposed of. 13. Needless to state, nothing hereinabove shall be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. 14. A copy of this order be sent to the concerned learned Trial Court for necessary information and compliance. 15. The order be uploaded on the website forthwith. MADHU JAIN, J SEPTEMBER 17, 2026/JYH/PG 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 19/09/2026 at 12:00:15