$~70 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010447602026 + CRL.M.C. 6978/2026 MEHAR NIGAR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Pawan Reley, Mr. Akshay Lodhi, Ms. Simran Singh, Mr. Tanish Rawat and Mr. Prakhar Agrawal, Advocates. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Yudhvir Singh Chauhan, APP with Mr. Abhimanyu Arya, Advocate for State. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA O R D E R % 21.09.2026 1. This petition under Sections 528 and 529 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 [“BNSS”] has been filed by the Petitioner, who is one of the accused in proceedings arising out of FIR No. 260/2019, registered at P.S. Saket. The Petitioner seeks a limited direction to the Trial Court for expeditious pronouncement of the order on charge in Criminal Case No. 4979/2023, titled State v. Mehar Nigar & Anr., pending before the Court of JMFC-02 (Mahila Court), South, Saket Courts, New Delhi. 2. The grievance of the Petitioner is that the matter has remained pending at the stage of order on charge. It is submitted that the arguments on charge stood concluded on 22nd January, 2026 and that written submissions were thereafter filed. The Petitioner relies upon the orders passed by the Trial Court 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 23/09/2026 at 10:36:05 on various dates. Copies of the orders dated 7th November, 2025 and 22nd January, 2026 have been handed over across the board and are taken on record. 3. From a perusal of the orders handed over in Court, it does not categorically appear that the arguments on charge stood concluded on 22nd January, 2026. The order dated 7th November, 2025 records that the matter was to be taken up for arguments on charge on 22nd January, 2026, while the order dated 22nd January, 2026 records that the matter was put up for filing of written synopsis/order on charge on 6th February, 2026. The subsequent order history, however, indicates that the matter was thereafter repeatedly listed for order on charge. 4. In these circumstances, although the Petitioner submits that more than eight months have elapsed since conclusion of the arguments on charge, the Court is unable, on the basis of the record placed before it, to conclusively determine the date on which the arguments on charge stood concluded. The order history placed before the Court does, however, indicate that the matter has been repeatedly listed for order on charge, including on 6th February, 26th February, 11th March, 10th April, 11th May, 22nd July and 10th August, 2026. The matter is stated to be next listed on 23rd September, 2026. 5. In case the arguments on charge have concluded, the Trial Court should proceed towards pronouncing the order on charge. 6. In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of with a request to the Trial Court to pass the order on charge expeditiously, preferably within six weeks from today, subject to the convenience and exigencies of the Court. 7. The present petition is disposed of in the above terms. 8. It is clarified that this Court has not examined the merits of the case or 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 23/09/2026 at 10:36:05 the material on record against the Petitioner. No opinion is expressed on the question as to whether any charge is liable to be framed. SANJEEV NARULA, J SEPTEMBER 21, 2026 as 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 23/09/2026 at 10:36:05