Rakesh Gitaram Bhatt v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr

O R D E R %

14.11.2025

¶1The present petition is filed seeking quashing of FIR No. 618/2022 dated 19.08.2022 for offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 registered at Police Station Samaipur Badli.

¶2Briefly stated, the FIR was registered on a complaint given by Respondent No. 2/President of TR Sawhney Motors Private Limited. It is alleged that the accused Sumedh and Sahil worked as a Direct Sale agent with TR Sawhney Motors Private Limited (hereafter 'company') and had purchased numerous cars from the company for their clients. It is alleged that an Ertiga VXI CNG was booked by the accused Sumedh and Sahil in the name of the petitioner and the balance amount of ₹8 lakhs was transferred by the petitioner in the account of the company for getting an early delivery, however, the same was not delivered to him. It is alleged that when the petitioner sought refund of his This is a digitally signed order. money against the cancellation, it was found that the amount deposited by the petitioner on 09.12.2021 was credited against the order of another customer namely Ravindra Kanip Mane, who was also the reference of accused Sumedh and Sahil. It is alleged that the accused Sumedh and Sahil had requested to adjust the said amount transferred by the petitioner against the order of Ravindra Kanip Mane who had also booked an Ertiga VXI CNG from the company and had got a delivery on

09.12.2021. It is alleged that the petitioner along with accused Sumedh, Sahil and Ravinder Kanip Mane conspired to cheat Respondent No.2 of Rs.8,00,000/-.

¶3The learned Standing Counsel for the State submits that since the other co-accused have been absconding, the investigation could not be completed.

¶4He submits that appropriate steps will be taken expeditiously for filing a report before the learned Trial Court.

¶5He submits that, at this stage, no evidence has been found against the petitioner and, therefore, no action is proposed against the petitioner.

¶6Considering the above, no orders are required to be passed at this stage since no action is proposed against the petitioner.

¶7The State is directed to expedite filing of the report.

¶8The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶9Needless to say, the petitioner is at liberty to approach this Court in case any grievance remains in future. AMIT MAHAJAN, J NOVEMBER 14, 2025/"SS" This is a digitally signed order.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 2782/2022 RAKESH GITARAM BHATT .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Shivamsinh Deshmukh, Adv. (through VC) versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Rupali Bandhopadhya, ASC for the State with Ms. Amisha Gupta, Adv. SI Amit, PS- Samaipur Badli CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN