[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Delhi High Court
Smt. Sarita Batra vs State (Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi) & Anr on 7 February, 2026
$~7 & 8
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 7th February, 2026
+ W.P.(CRL) 1638/2023 & CRL.M.A. 15263/2023 & CRL.M.A.
23803/2023
SMT. SARITA BATRA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Sanjeev Mahajan and Ms. Simran,
Rao, Advocates along with petitioner-
in-person
versus
STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Amol Sinha (ASC) with Mr.
Manan Wadhwa, Kshitiz Garg and Mr.
Ashvini Kumar, Advocates for State
Mr. Bhupender Singh and Mr.
Shubham Sagar, Advocates for R-2/
Complainant
SI Nitesh Singh, PS Mukherjee Nagar
+ W.P.(CRL) 1346/2024 & CRL.M.A. 13215/2024
MOHINDER KUMAR CHADHA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Rama Nath Jha, Mr. Yogyank
Mishra and Mr. Abhishek Raj,
Advocates
versus
GOVT OF NCT DELHI THROUGH SHO & ANR. ....Respondents
Through: Mr. Sanjeev Bhandari, ASC (Criminal)
along with Mr. Arjit Sharma and Ms.
Sakshi Jha, Advocates for State
Mr. Bhupender Singh and Mr.
Shubham Sagar, Advocates for R-2/
Complainant
SI Nitesh Singh, PS Mukherjee Nagar
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN
J U D G M E N T (oral)
1. Both the aforesaid petitions are connected.
2. Mr. Ram Prakash Chaudhary (respondent no. 2 in both the petitions)
was, at the relevant time, posted as Post Graduate Teacher (Mathematics) in
Signed By:SONIA W.P.(CRL) 1638/2023 & W.P.(CRL) 1346/2024 1
Govt. Boys Senior Secondary School, Rohini, Delhi. He was charged with
misconduct of tampering and altering marks of some of the students which
resulted in initiation of departmental proceedings against him.
3. In such departmental proceedings, Ms. Sarita Batra [petitioner in W.P.
(CRL)1638/2023] was made Inquiry Officer and Mr. Mohinder Kumar Chadha
[petitioner in W.P. (CRL) 1346/2023] was appointed Presenting Officer.
4. According to complainant Mr. Ram Prakash Chaudhary, during
pendency of the aforesaid inquiry proceedings, there were casteist remarks by
both of them, which resulted in registration FIR No. 559/2019 dated
05.11.2019, registered at PS Shalimar Bagh.
5. Initially, a petition was filed seeking quashing of the aforesaid FIR but
fact remains that in the interregnum, a cancellation report was laid before the
learned Trial Court and, therefore, aforesaid quashing petition was not pursued
with and was permitted to be withdrawn.
6. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that they were under the
impression that cancellation report has been filed and accepted whereas while
considering the cancellation report, though learned Trial Court did not find any
infirmity in such final report, so far as it related to cancellation in context of
offence under Section 3 (1) (r) & (s) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, it observed that there was act of 'wrongful
confinement' and 'criminal intimidation' punishable under Section 3 (2)(va) of
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
and took cognizance, while also disposing of the protest petition filed by
respondent no. 2.
7. Such summoning order dated 09.05.2023 is under challenge.
8. Simultaneously, there is request for quashing of aforesaid FIR, for the
reason that the aforesaid offences are not made out.
Signed By:SONIA W.P.(CRL) 1638/2023 & W.P.(CRL) 1346/2024 2
9. It has, now, been apprised that even otherwise, matter has been amicably
settled between the parties.
10. Complainant i.e. respondent no. 2 Mr. Ram Prakash Chaudhary is
present in person with learned counsel Mr. Bhupender Singh and Mr. Shubham
Sagar.
11. Respondent no. 2 seeks to place on record his affidavit.
12. Such affidavit is to the effect that he has resolved all his disputes with
the petitioners and now he is left with no grievance against them. It also
mentions that he would have no objection if FIR in question i.e. FIR No.
559/2019, registered at Police Station Shalimar Bagh is quashed. It is also
mentioned therein that dispute had arisen on account of some
misunderstanding, which has been amicably and fully resolved.
13. Respondent no. 2 reiterates the facts mentioned in his said affidavit and
submits that he has signed the affidavit after understanding and comprehending
its contents. He, however, also prays that let it also come on record that in view
of amicable resolution, no action shall be taken by the petitioners, in relation to
the FIR in question.
14. Affidavit is taken on record.
15. Both the petitioners are present and they submit that there is no question
of their taking any action in the matter and they also assure and undertake not
to take any further action, of any nature whatsoever, in the matter.
16. Their such undertakings are taken on record.
17. As already noted above, both the petitioners have been summoned for
committing offence of wrongful confinement, intimidation and for related
offences under Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 i.e. Section 3 (2)(va) of Scheduled Castes and the
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
Signed By:SONIA W.P.(CRL) 1638/2023 & W.P.(CRL) 1346/2024 3
18. Keeping in mind the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the age
of the incident and the fact that respondent no. 2, who is the real aggrieved
person, has given his no objection for the quashing of FIR in question, both the
aforesaid petitions are disposed of while directing that FIR No. 559/2019 dated
05.11.2019, registered at Police Station Shalimar Bagh and all the proceedings
emanating from the said FIR stand quashed.
19. Needless to say, since FIR and all the proceedings emanating from the
said FIR have been quashed, the aforesaid summoning order dated 09.05.2023,
which is impugned herein, does not survive anymore and such order also stands
set aside.
20. Pending applications also stand disposed of in aforesaid terms.
(MANOJ JAIN)
JUDGE
FEBRUARY 7, 2026/dr/js
Signed By:SONIA W.P.(CRL) 1638/2023 & W.P.(CRL) 1346/2024 4
