Xx v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors

O R D E R %

01.09.2026

¶1The petition is for the following reliefs: "a) Issue an appropriate writ, order, or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondents No.1 to 3 to complete the investigation in FIR No. 367/2023 dated 20.07.2023, registered at PS Bhajanpura under Sections 376/ 392/ 354A/ 354B/ 452/ 120B/ 323/ 341/ 354/ 506/ 509/ 34 IPC, in a time-bound and fair manner b) And if this Hon'ble Court is satisfied that the local police is in collusion with the accused persons and they are failed to act as per law despite the heinous nature of the offence committed by the accused persons, than to transfer the investigation to an independent investigating agency; c) The investigating officer be directed to take on record the material i.e., videos of the accused person abusing and using filthy language against the petitioner and her family members."

¶2It is submitted that during the pendency of the petition the charge-sheet has been filed and even the cognizance has been taken. This is a digitally signed order. 3. Therefore, if the petitioner has any grievance with respect to manner in which the investigation has been carried out, the petitioner shall be at liberty to raise all the issues before the concerned Court. The concerned Court is fully empowered to direct for further investigation or to monitor the same. The reference can be made to the decisions passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P.1, 2008 2 SCC 409, wherein, in paragraph nos. 27 and 28 has held as under: "27. As we have already observed above, the Magistrate has very wide powers to direct registration of an FIR and to ensure a proper investigation and for this purpose he can monitor the investigation to ensure that the investigation is done properly (though he cannot investigate himself). The High Court should discourage the practice of filing a writ petition or petition under Section 482 CrPC simply because a person has a grievance that his FIR has not been registered by the police, or after being registered, proper investigation has not been done by the police. For this grievance, the remedy lies under Sections 36 and 154(3) before the police officers concerned, and if that is of no avail, under Section 156(3) CrPC before the Magistrate or by filing a criminal complaint under Section 200 CrPC and not by filing a writ petition or a petition under Section 482 CrPC.

¶28It is true that alternative remedy is not an absolute bar to a writ petition, but it is equally well settled that if there is an alternative remedy the High Court should not ordinarily interfere.".

¶4With the aforesaid observation, the petition along with pending application, stands disposed of. PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J SEPTEMBER 1, 2026 aks 1 (2008) 2 SCC 409 This is a digitally signed order.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010831412025 + W.P.(CRL) 3507/2025 and CRL.M.A. 31820/2025 XX .....Petitioner Through: Mr. P. S. Sharma and Mr. Pratyaksh Rajput, Advocates. versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Abhijeet Kumar, Advocate for the State. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV