W.P.(CRL) 2973/2026 $~80 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010454902026 + W.P.(CRL) 2973/2026 SITA RAM PANDEY .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Onkar Roy, Ms. Aastha Phuloria, Mr. Yash Goyal, Advs. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjay Lao, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Manoj Pant, APP, Mr. Abhinav Kumar Arya, Mr. Aryan Sachdeva, Advs. SI Animesh Anand, P.S. Jagat Puri SI Avneesh Kumar, P.S. Krishna Nagar. Mr. Daksh Bhardwaj, GP for UOI CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MADHU JAIN O R D E R % 23.09.2026 1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. 2. The present 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 as the ‘BNSS’), seeking an independent inquiry/investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation or any other independent agency into the circumstances surrounding FIR No. 438/2023 registered at P.S. Jagatpuri, Shahdara, Delhi. The petitioner also seeks initiation of proceedings against respondent Nos. 2 to 4. 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 24/09/2026 at 11:36:29 W.P.(CRL) 2973/2026 BRIEF FACTS: 3. The petitioner states that he is a retired Naval personnel and after his retirement, has been associated with private business through M/s Amethi Enterprises, a sole proprietorship concern of his wife, Mrs. Neera Pandey. According to the petitioner, he is the authorised representative of the said concern and is involved in its day-to-day affairs, though the proprietorship is stated to be in the name of his wife. 4. The grievance of the petitioner arises primarily from a notice dated 20.09.2023, stated to have been issued under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. by respondent No. 2, directing him to join investigation in FIR No. 438/2023. The notice, as placed on record by the petitioner, refers to offences under Sections 420/379 IPC and states that certain transactions had been made in the account of M/s Amethi Enterprises. 5. According to the petitioner, during the course of investigation he was informed that two amounts of Rs.10,000/- each had been credited to the bank account of M/s Amethi Enterprises. The petitioner states that he thereafter approached the concerned bank and obtained the account statement. 6. The petitioner thereafter submitted a complaint dated 25.09.2023 to the Commissioner of Police raising his grievance regarding the investigation and expressing apprehension that he was being falsely implicated. He also relies upon a call allegedly made by respondent No. 2 to the Directorate of Administration (Contract Management), Naval Headquarters, on 30.10.2023. An internal communication prepared by the said office records that a caller identifying himself as Sub-Inspector Avnish from P.S. Jagatpuri had enquired about the petitioner and stated that the petitioner was connected with an extortion case and that the extortion amount had been transferred 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 24/09/2026 at 11:36:29 W.P.(CRL) 2973/2026 his bank account. 7. The petitioner subsequently obtained, under the Right to Information Act, a copy of FIR No. 438/2023. The FIR supplied to him records an incident relating to the theft/snatching of an iPhone and contains Sections 379/356/411/34 IPC. The petitioner relies upon this document to contend that the FIR has no connection with the allegations communicated to him regarding the two transactions of Rs.10,000/- each. 8. The petitioner consequently seeks transfer of the investigation to the CBI or another independent agency and also seeks registration of an FIR against the concerned police officials and other persons alleged to be involved in the matter. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER: 9. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was called by the Investigating Officer in relation to an alleged offence of cheating, whereas the FIR No. 438/2023 obtained by him under the RTI Act relates to theft/snatching of an iPhone under Sections 379/356/411/34 IPC. It is submitted that there is, therefore, no apparent nexus between the petitioner and the FIR. 10. Learned counsel further submits that the bank account in question belonged to M/s Amethi Enterprises, which is a proprietorship concern of the petitioner's wife. The mere fact that the petitioner was an authorised representative of the concern could not, according to learned counsel, constitute material connecting him with the alleged offence. It is submitted that the two credits of Rs.10,000/- each do not by themselves establish the petitioner's involvement in any offence. 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 24/09/2026 at 11:36:29 W.P.(CRL) 2973/2026 11. It is further submitted that the notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. was handwritten, that no original copy was served upon the petitioner and that the notice was not in the prescribed format. 12. Learned counsel has also relied upon the communication made to the Naval Headquarters and the status report to submit that false allegations were deliberately circulated against the petitioner. According to learned counsel, the reference to an extortion case, the alleged recovery/apprehension of the petitioner and the alleged raid are contrary to the actual FIR. It is submitted that the petitioner had already brought these matters to the notice of the senior police authorities in September 2023, but no effective action was taken. 13. It is thus contended that the inconsistencies are not merely procedural irregularities but disclose a larger design to implicate the petitioner and prejudice his business relations with the Naval Headquarters. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT: 14. On the other hand, learned APP appearing for the State opposes the petition. It is submitted that the petitioner was associated with the investigation as certain amounts had been credited into the bank account of M/s Amethi Enterprises and the police, during investigation, had obtained the relevant bank particulars. The issuance of notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. was therefore in the course of investigation and the petitioner had, in fact, appeared pursuant thereto. 15. Learned APP submits that the allegations raised by the petitioner require appreciation of the investigative material and disputed questions of fact cannot be conclusively adjudicated in writ jurisdiction. The alleged contradiction regarding the nature of the offence, the circumstances in which 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 24/09/2026 at 11:36:29 W.P.(CRL) 2973/2026 the petitioner was questioned and the contents of the communications made to the Naval Headquarters are matters which require factual verification. 16. It is further submitted that the petitioner had knowledge of the matter since September 2023, as is also evident from the complaint submitted by him to the Commissioner of Police at that time. The present petition has been instituted nearly three years thereafter. It is submitted that no circumstances have been demonstrated to show that the investigation by the local police is so tainted that it warrants transfer to an independent agency. 17. Learned counsel for the respondents further submits that the petitioner cannot seek a particular investigating agency merely on the basis of allegations of bias or dissatisfaction with the manner in which the investigation has proceeded. It is submitted that the extraordinary power to transfer investigation is required to be exercised sparingly and only where circumstances on record justify such intervention. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS: 18. This Court has considered the submissions and perused the material placed on record. 19. At the outset, the jurisdiction to transfer an investigation to an agency other than the State police is an extraordinary jurisdiction. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that such a power is to be exercised sparingly, in rare and exceptional cases, where the circumstances demonstrate that the investigation lacks credibility, is prima facie tainted or where intervention is necessary to instil confidence in the investigative process. In K.V. Rajendran v. Superintendent of Police, CBCID South Zone, Chennai, (2013) 12 SCC 480, the Supreme Court held that such constitutional power is to be exercised only in rare and exceptional circumstances. 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 24/09/2026 at 11:36:29 W.P.(CRL) 2973/2026 20. The decision in Kabir Shankar Bose v. State of West Bengal, 2024 INSC 930, relied upon by the petitioner, also recognises that a transfer of investigation is not to be ordered in a routine or perfunctory manner merely because one party makes allegations against the investigating agency. The Supreme Court interfered in that case upon considering the peculiar admitted circumstances before it, including circumstances giving rise to a credible apprehension regarding the ability of the local police to conduct an impartial investigation. 21. In the present case, the primary basis for seeking such transfer is the alleged contradiction between the FIR, the notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C., the e-FIR, the status report and the communication made to the Naval Headquarters. These documents undoubtedly raise questions regarding the manner in which the investigation was conducted and the description of the allegations at different stages. However, the mere existence of such inconsistencies, without further material establishing deliberate fabrication or a tainted investigation, cannot by itself justify the transfer of investigation to the CBI. 22. The same would apply to the petitioner's contention regarding the source of the two credits of Rs.10,000/- each. The material before the Court establishes, at the least, that such transactions were noticed in the account of M/s Amethi Enterprises and that the police sought details of the account during investigation. The petitioner disputes any knowledge or involvement on his part. Whether the transactions have any connection with the petitioner and whether any criminal liability arises therefrom are matters for investigation and cannot be conclusively determined merely from the pleadings in the present writ petition. 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 24/09/2026 at 11:36:29 W.P.(CRL) 2973/2026 23. The allegation that respondent No. 2 contacted the Naval Headquarters with an intention to cause loss to the petitioner is also founded primarily upon the interpretation placed by the petitioner on the communication recorded by respondent No. 4. The fact that such a communication was made is borne out by the document placed on record. However, the motive attributed to respondent No. 2 and the allegation of collusion between the police officer and the Naval officials are disputed questions which cannot be inferred merely from the existence of the communication. 24. There is also considerable delay in invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court. The petitioner was aware of the proceedings and of his grievance regarding the notice and the alleged transactions in September 2023 itself. He addressed a complaint to the Commissioner of Police on 25/09/2023. The present writ petition, however, has been instituted in September 2026. While delay by itself may not defeat a genuine grievance, in the facts of the present case it assumes significance when the petitioner seeks transfer of an investigation on the basis of events of 2023 and relies upon material which was within his knowledge substantially at that time. 25. The relief sought by the petitioner is also wider than the material presently placed before the Court can support. The petitioner seeks not only transfer of investigation to an independent agency but also registration of an FIR against several police and Naval officials. Such a direction cannot be issued merely on the basis of allegations of fabrication and conspiracy, particularly when the foundational factual allegations themselves are disputed. 26. It is important to clarify that the observations made herein are confined to the question as to whether the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court ought 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 24/09/2026 at 11:36:29 W.P.(CRL) 2973/2026 to be invoked for transfer of investigation. This Court is not expressing any opinion on the correctness or otherwise of the allegations made by the petitioner, the genuineness of any particular document, or the ultimate merits of the investigation. The competent authorities shall deal with the investigation and any grievance regarding official conduct in accordance with law. 27. On an overall consideration of the material, this Court is unable to find circumstances of such exceptional nature as would warrant displacement of the investigation from the local police to the CBI or any other independent agency. 28. The petitioner's grievance, including the discrepancies pointed out by him, may be examined in accordance with law by the competent authorities; however, the material presently available does not justify the extraordinary relief sought in the present proceedings. 29. The petition is, accordingly, disposed of. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. 30. The order be uploaded on the website forthwith. MADHU JAIN, J SEPTEMBER 23, 2026/prg/P 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 24/09/2026 at 11:36:29