Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 8, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Mona Ghosh vs State (Nct Of Delhi) & Anr on 17 April, 2026

Author: Anup Jairam Bhambhani

Bench: Anup Jairam Bhambhani

                          $~75
                          *         IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                          +         CRL.REV.P. 241/2026 & CRL.M.A. 11806/2026
                                    MONA GHOSH                                                                      .....Petitioner
                                                                  Through:            Counsel (appearance not given)

                                                                  versus

                                    STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.                .....Respondents
                                                  Through: Mr. Shoaib Haider, APP for the State.
                                                            SI Vineesha, P.S.: Sarojini Nagar.

                                    CORAM:
                                    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI
                                                                  ORDER

% 17.04.2026 CRL.M.A. 11807/2026 (exemption) Exemption granted, subject to just exceptions. Let requisite compliances be made within 01 week. The application stands disposed of.

CRL.REV.P. 241/2026 & CRL.M.A. 11806/2026 (stay) By way of the present petition filed under section 442 read with section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, the petitioner impugns order dated 18.03.2026, whereby the learned Sessions Court has been pleased to issue summons to the petitioner as an additional accused in exercise of section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 ('Cr.P.C.').

2. Petitioner has been summonsed for offence punishable under section 354C of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('IPC').

CRL.REV.P. 241/2026 Page 1 of 3

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 24/04/2026 at 21:24:41

3. Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits, that the matter arises from an allegation that the petitioner had video recorded her husband having physical relations with the complainant.

4. Learned senior counsel submits, that a bare perusal of section 354C of the IPC would show that the offence is not gender neutral and only a man can be accused of committing the offence of voyeurism; and therefore, the petitioner cannot be charged for the offence at all since she is a woman.

5. Learned senior counsel further argues, that the subject FIR is dated 14.03.2021, and even though there is no specific date on which the offence is alleged to have been committed, it must be inferred that the offence would pre-date the registration of the FIR. However, the impugned order taking cognizance and issuing summons to the petitioner has been passed on 18.03.2026, i.e., beyond the 03 year limitation period prescribed under section 468(2)(c) of the Cr.P.C, since a first offence under section 354C IPC is punishable with a maximum of 03 years of imprisonment; and there is no allegation against the petitioner having committed any prior offence under section 354C IPC.

6. That apart, learned senior counsel has also drawn attention of this court to a decision of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Hardeep Singh vs. State of Punjab and Others1, which lays down, that before exercising the discretionary and extraordinary power under section 319 Cr.P.C., the court must form an opinion that there is 1 (2014) 3 SCC 92 CRL.REV.P. 241/2026 Page 2 of 3 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 24/04/2026 at 21:24:41 strong and cogent evidence against the person being sought to be added as an accused; and that such power should not be exercised in a casual or cavalier manner.

7. Issue notice.

8. Mr. Shoaib Haider, learned APP appears for the State on advance copy; accepts notice; and seeks time to file status report.

9. Upon the petitioner taking requisite steps, let notice be sent to respondent No.2 by all permissible modes; returnable for the next date.

10. Let status report/reply be filed within 04 weeks; rejoinder(s) thereto, if any, be filed within 06 weeks thereafter; with copies to the opposing counsel.

11. Re-notify on 11th August 2026.

12. On a prima-facie view of the matter, and in particular, the contention raised as to the applicability of section 354C of the IPC in relation to a woman; and the limitation period applicable to the offence in view of section 468(2)(c) of the Cr.P.C., further proceedings before the learned trial court in case FIR No.041/2021 dated 14.03.2021 registered under sections 313/376 of the IPC at P.S.: Sarojini Nagar shall remain stayed qua the petitioner, till the next date of hearing before this court.

ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J APRIL 17, 2026 ss CRL.REV.P. 241/2026 Page 3 of 3 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 24/04/2026 at 21:24:41