Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 09.04.2026
ANITA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Shailendra Mani Tripathi, Ms. Pooja Shilpkar, Mr. P. Raghab
Mishra, Ms. Manisha Yadav, Mr. Praveen Kumar Mishra and Mr. Vishal Kumar, Advocates
Through: Mr. Yasir Rauf Ansari, ASC for the State and Mr. Alok Sharma, Advocate with SI Sandeep
JUDGMENT
1. For convenience, the prayer clause of the petition is extracted below: “In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the petitioner herein most humbly prays that this hon'ble court may be pleased to:
2. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his prayer in the present case is not for registration of FIR, but only for appropriate action on his complaint. That being so, learned ASC for State appearing on advance intimation submits that they are already acting on the complaint/representation of the petitioner in accordance with law and inquiry is already being conducted to ascertain if any cognizable offence is made out from the complaint.
3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that police has no power to decide whether the complaint makes out a cognizable offence or not and it is only the complainant, who shall decide if a cognizable offence is made out or not.
4. Learned counsel for petitioner wants to refer to some notification, but copy of that notification has not even been filed.
5. Prima facie, the petition appears to be completely frivolous because the petitioner is conscious that she cannot file a petition seeking registration of FIR without exhausting the remedies available in law. Besides, I have also gone through the complaint dated 13.02.2026 of the petitioner. Since the issue is yet to be examined by the competent court of Magistrate, I would refrain from recording my view as to whether any cognizable offence is made out or not.
6. The petition is completely devoid of merit and frivolous, therefore, dismissed.
GIRISH KATHPALIA (JUDGE) APRIL 9, 2026 ‘rs’