Delhi High Court - Orders
Ca Rakesh Kumar Gupta vs State - The Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi on 4 December, 2025
Author: Neena Bansal Krishna
Bench: Neena Bansal Krishna
$~41
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(CRL) 2495/2024, CRL.M.A. 24305/2024, CRL.M.A.
24306/2024, CRL.M.A. 24307/2024, CRL.M.A. 234/2025,
CRL.M.A. 10785/2025, CRL.M.A. 26326/2025 & CRL.M.A.
26327/2025
CA RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA .....Petitioner
Through: Petitioner in person
versus
STATE - THE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent
Through: Ms. Rupali Bandhopadhya, ASC for
State with Mr. Amit Peswani,
Mr. Abhijeet Kumar and Ms. Amisha
Gupta, Advocates
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
ORDER
% 04.12.2025
1. Criminal Writ Petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as "BNSS") read with Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed on behalf of the Petitioner/CA Rakesh Kumar Gupta (accused) for quashing of FIR No. 0189/2012 under Sections 384/385/387/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as "IPC") registered at P.S. Shalimar Bagh.
2. It is submitted that FIR was registered on the Complaint dated 26.07.2012 on the allegations that the Petitioner had been extending threats for extortion of money. After the registration of FIR, his Statement dated 26.07.2012 was recorded but he refused to sign the same. His Dossier Report dated 27.07.2012 has been filed, but it is asserted that the Complaint 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 09/12/2025 at 20:44:52 itself is false. Press release dated 27.07.2012 was issued in respect of the Complaint being filed against the Petitioner. The DCP Office fed news dated 27.07.2012, about the FIR, which was published in the newspaper on 28.07.2012.
3. It is submitted that there was a long-drawn dispute between the Petitioner and the Complainant. Various Writs have been filed since 2006 in regard to the allotment of land, its illegal encroachment of public land and unauthorized construction. The property was jointly inspected by DDA and MCD on 31.01.2012 and the illegal construction and public land encroachment was noted, for which action against them was taken by DDA and MCD. It is the claim of the Petitioner that on his Complaints, demolition of the unauthorized construction of the second floor of the premises of the Complainant, was done by MCD, which resulted in a loss of about Rs.2 crores to the Complainant.
4. It is claimed that the Complainant's family along with tax evaders, had hatched a conspiracy to implicate the Petitioner in a false case to take revenge and eliminate him. They came to the Petitioner's house various times to extend threats to him and recorded said proceedings. It is claimed that these recordings are doctored.
5. The Complaint against the Petitioner was made at 4:30 PM on 26.07.2012 and the FIR was registered at 4:35 PM. The Complainant's family came to the Petitioner's house at about 8:15 PM and put a polythene bag on the table. The Police arrived within one minute and snatched the phone from the Petitioner. They picked the polythene bag and left for the Police Station within less than a few minutes. He was interrogated by the 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 09/12/2025 at 20:44:52 Police for about 30 minutes at the Police Station and was shown the FIR. The petitioner informed them about the correct facts.
6. It is claimed that the Police has falsely implicated him in this false case and is using every trick to delay the filing of the Chargesheet, which has been filed after the period of 03 years, under Sections 384/385 IPC. It is claimed that the limitation had expired on 27.07.2015 in terms of Section 468(2)(c) Cr.P.C. It is further asserted that the offence of forgery has been added in the Chargesheet, only to increase the period of limitation.
7. The quashing of the FIR has been sought on the grounds that the Complaint which is the basis of the FIR is false. It is motivated and mala fide as before the date of complaint, the unauthorized construction carried out by the Complainant in his premises, had already been demolished as is evident from the various documents. He was arrested on 26.07.2012 at 9:15 PM, but his mobile had been deposited in the malkhana on the same day.
8. It is asserted that the Press Release has been made on 28.07.2012 reporting this registration of FIR. It is all an endeavor to falsely implicate the Applicant.
9. It is also claimed that the documents on which the Police proceedings have been conducted, are all fabricated and are ante-dated as is evident from the fact that all the papers on which these documents have been executed, are of subsequent date. It is claimed that there are motivated allegations made in the Complaint and the FIR is liable to be dismissed.
10. The Status Report has been filed on behalf of the State wherein it is stated that a Complaint was made by one Nikhil Nagpal alleging that he was running a Bakery shop with the name and style of 'Ever Bake' at Local Market in Shalimar Bagh. Rakesh Gupta, the Petitioner, has been harassing 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 09/12/2025 at 20:44:52 him by filing false Complaints against the shop, for the last 08 months. He has filed Complaints in DDA, MCD Offices. Officials from these departments have been coming to his shop for inquiry because of which he is facing a lot of harassment.
11. Fed up with these false Complaints, the Complainant and his brother and brother Sahil and father Nagesh, went to meet Rakesh Gupta at his house in March 2012 and requested him not to file false Complaints against them. Rakesh Gupta, the Petitioner, then told them that if they wanted to save themselves from losses, they must give Rs.10 lacs for him to sit quietly or else he would get the lease of the shop cancelled from DDA, by filing false Complaints and get their business closed. Thereafter, they all returned back home.
12. Thereafter, Rakesh Gupta, the Petitioner, increased filing Complaints against the shop. On 18.07.2012, the Complainant and his uncle, Pramvir Nagpal, again approached the Petitioner at his residence, again requesting for not making any Complaints on which he again demanded Rs.10 lacs, in lieu of stopping to make Complaints. He extended threats that unless the money was given, he would continue to make such Complaints. The Complainant and his uncle again approached the Petitioner on 09.07.2012 but he repeated his demand.
13. Left with no option, they paid Rs.3 lacs to let them work peacefully on which he said that if they would talk about Rs.2-3 lacs, then he would raise the demand to Rs.20-25 lacs. The Complainant recorded this conversation with the Petitioner on a spy camera and provided the CD to the Police.
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 09/12/2025 at 20:44:52
14. Again, the call was made by the Petitioner for demanding money on 26.07.2012 at 6:30 PM. The FIR under Section 384/385 IPC was thus, registered. The statements of the witnesses have been recorded and the transcript of the conversation has been produced by the Complainant.
15. On 26.07.2012, the Complainant along with his father and uncle, came to the Police Station and apprised that the Petitioner had called them to his house for delivery of Rs. 3 lacs at 6:30 PM. The Raiding Party was formed and the money was taken by the Complainant for giving the first installment of Rs.3 lacs, to the Petitioner.
16. As per the plan, the Complainant gave a missed call from his phone to the IO. The Raiding Party caught the Petitioner red-handed while extorting money. He was arrested in the case in which his disclosure was recorded. The spy camera was produced by the Complainant in the Police Station on 11.09.2015 when it was seized by the IO.
17. The Chargesheet was prepared under Section 384/385/387/506 IPC which was presented in the Court on 07.03.2017. The FSL Report has also been received which has been filed along with the Supplementary Chargesheet.
Submissions heard and record perused.
18. The Charge Sheet has been filed on the specific allegations of extortion and threat. Essentially, the Petitioner is challenging the Charge Sheet on merits and is alleging that the entire Complaint and the evidence collected by the Police, is false and fabricated. However, these are the aspects which can be adjudicated only by way of trial and cannot be considered in the present Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India read with Section 528 BNSS.
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 09/12/2025 at 20:44:52
19. The Petition along with pending Applications is hereby, disposed of with liberty to the Petitioner to raise all his contentions before the learned Trial Court at the appropriate stage.
20. Pending Applications if any are also disposed of accordingly.
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J DECEMBER 4, 2025 N 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 09/12/2025 at 20:44:52