Delhi High Court
W.P.(CRL)/3012/2026 of SACHIN Vs STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. on 28 September 2026
HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010461392026 + W.P.(CRL) 3012/2026 SACHIN .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Shiv Kumar Gautam, Ms. Niharika Kashyap and Ms. Nidhi, Advocates. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Rupali Bandhopadhyaya, ASC alongwith Mr.
$~71
*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CNR No. DLHC010461392026
+
W.P.(CRL) 3012/2026
SACHIN
.....Petitioner
Through:
Mr.
Shiv
Kumar
Gautam,
Ms.
Niharika Kashyap and Ms. Nidhi,
Advocates.
versus
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.
.....Respondents
Through:
Ms. Rupali Bandhopadhyaya, ASC
alongwith Mr. Abhijeet Kumar and
Ms. Amrita Gupta, Advocates for the
State.
SI Ravi Beniwal, PS Lajpat Nagar.
Mr. Mujeeb Ahmed and Ms.Rabia
Ruby, Advocates for R4.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA
%
28.09.2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
O R D E R
1. The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Surksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter “BNSS”) by the petitioner seeking directions to respondent no(s) 1 to 3 (Police authorities) to protect his life and liberty from the respondent no(s). 4 to 7 along with their associates.
2. The factual conspectus, as disclosed in the petition, is that the petitioner is a businessman engaged in providing wellness and healthcare related services and having various establishments at Lajpat Nagar, Delhi.
3. It is submitted that the petitioner had employed the respondent no.4, namely Smt. Pooja as a receptionist at one of his wellness establishments.
After some time, the respondent no.4 was appointed as the manager. The petition avers that the respondent no.4 and the petitioner developed an intimate relationship, out which a baby-girl was born on 27.09.2023.
4. The respondent no. 5 and 6 are the brothers of the respondent no.4 and respondent no.7 is the mother of the respondent no.4.
5. The petition alleges that the respondent no.4 has been threatening the petitioner that she will implead him in a false rape case, unless he pays some money to the respondent no.4.
6. It is averred that a draft settlement deed has been given by the respondent no.4 to the petitioner. It is further averred that on 20.09.2026, the respondent no(s). 4 to 7 came to one of the wellness centres of the petitioner and threatened the petitioner to pay Rs.50,00,000/- and transfer 50% share in the properties of the petitioner to the respondent no.4.
7. On 21.09.2026, the petitioner sent a written complaint to SHO, P.S. Lajpat Nagar. He also sent legal notice to the respondent no.4 of even date. No FIR is stated to have been registered.
8. The petitioner himself states that the respondent no.4 has made a complaint alleging that she is already married to the petitioner. The same has been averred in paragraph 9 of the present petition.
9. The factual narration of the petition discloses that there are disputes between the petitioner and the respondent no(s). 4 to 7, with claims on both sides arising out of a personal relationship and birth of the child.
10. As noticed, the petitioner as also the respondent no.4 have filed their respective complaints with SHO, P.S. Lajpat Nagar, Delhi.
11. In the circumstances, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the SHO P.S. Lajpat Nagar to examine the petitioner’s complaint as also the complaint/s of the respondent no.4. Each complaint shall be dealt with in accordance with law. An FIR shall be registered, if a cognisable offence is disclosed. The SHO, P.S. Lajpat Nagar shall also assess the threat to the parties and shall ensure that protection is given, if necessary.
12. The present petition is disposed of in the above terms. Pending application/s also stand disposed of.
13. Nothing shall be construed as an expression of opinion of this Court on the respective factual versions of the petitioner and the respondent no.4.
SACHIN DATTA, J SEPTEMBER 28, 2026/at/nb