W.P.(CRL)/2924/2026 of IQTEDAR HUSSAIN MANSOORI Vs THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS on 21 September 2026

O R D E R

%

21.09.2026 CRL.M.A. 29209-29210/2026 (for exemption)

1. Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. W.P.(CRL) 2924/2026

3. The writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘CrPC’) (corresponding to Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 [‘BNSS’]) seeking the following reliefs: - “a) seeking direction to respondent no.1 to add section 307 & 420/406/ 468/471 of section of IPC in FIR No.58/2026, PS; K,N, Katju Marg

b) further direction to complete the investigation in a time bound manner.” [Emphasis supplied]

4. Issue notice. Mr. Amol Sinha, Additional Standing Counsel [‘ASC’] for the State, accepts notice.

5. He submits that prayer clause ‘a’ cannot be maintained at this stage of the proceedings as investigation is still going on.

5.1. He submits that appropriate sections of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 [‘IPC’] or any other penal statute can be added by the Investigation Officer [‘IO’] itself at the stage of filing the final report, on the basis of the material which is discovered during investigation. Also, subsequently by the Trial Court at the stage of framing of the charge or during the pendency of the proceedings on the basis of the evidence.

5.2. He, therefore, submits that approaching this Court at this stage when the investigation is not complete is premature.

5.3. He also states on instructions from the IO that though there are eight

(8) accused in the FIR, notice has been issued to one [1] accused. He submits that the IO had sought bank statements, which have been received on 17.08.2026 and based on the record now available, the IO will proceed to issue notice to the remaining seven (7) accused.

5.4. He states on instructions that the IO will complete the investigation within a period of sixty (60) days from today.

6. In reply, Mr. Mobin Akhtar, learned counsel for the Petitioner, states that he is only pressing prayer clause ‘b’ in the present proceedings and, in view of the statement made by learned ASC, the Petitioner’s said prayer is satisfied.

7. The statement of the petitioner is taken on record, prayer clause (a) is disposed of as not pressed.

8. The statement of the ASC is taken on record, and the IO is directed to ensure completion of the investigation of the subject FIR, within sixty (60) days. The prayer (b) is disposed of in terms thereof.

9. In view of the aforesaid statements of the parties, the petition stands disposed of.

10. The digitally signed copy of this order, duly uploaded on the official website of the Delhi High Court, www.delhihighcourt.nic.in, shall be treated as a certified copy of the order for the purpose of ensuring compliance. No physical copy of the order shall be insisted upon by any authority/entity or litigant. MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J SEPTEMBER 21, 2026/rhc/AJ