$~107 to 110 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 08th September, 2026 # CNR No. DLHC010422812026 + CONT.CAS(C) 1635/2026 & CM APPL. 60634/2026 HARI OM GUPTA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Dhanesh Relan, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Jatin Bhatia, Ms. Kriti Keya, Advocates (M:9990259571) versus STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Abhinav Singh, Mr. Rishab Mittal, Ms. Pearl Khurana, Advocates (M:9811188892) Ms. Divya Singhvi, GP for UOI (M:9599017054) SI Mohit Malik, PS-EOW, Mandir Marg, New Delhi (M:9953582192) 108 # CNR No. DLHC010422822026 + CONT.CAS(C) 1636/2026 & CM APPL. 60635/2026 HARBANS LAL SARIN THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS & ANR. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Dhanesh Relan, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Jatin Bhatia, Ms. Kriti Keya, Advocates (M:9990259571) versus STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Abhinav Singh, Mr. Rishab Mittal, Ms. Pearl Khurana, Advocates (M:9811188892) Ms. Divya Singhvi, GP for UOI (M:9599017054) SI Mohit Malik, PS-EOW, Mandir Marg, New Delhi (M:9953582192) 109 # CNR No. DLHC010422832026 + CONT.CAS(C) 1637/2026 & CM APPL. 60637/2026 ARUN SAXENA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Dhanesh Relan, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Jatin Bhatia, Ms. Kriti Keya, Advocates (M:9990259571) versus STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Abhinav Singh, Mr. Rishab Mittal, Ms. Pearl Khurana, Advocates (M:9811188892) Ms. Divya Singhvi, GP for UOI (M:9599017054) SI Mohit Malik, PS-EOW, Mandir Marg, New Delhi (M:9953582192) 110 # CNR No. DLHC010422842026 + CONT.CAS(C) 1638/2026 & CM APPL. 60638/2026 SMT SHASHI GULATI .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Dhanesh Relan, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Jatin Bhatia, Ms. Kriti Keya, Advocates (M:9990259571) versus STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Abhinav Singh, Mr. Rishab Mittal, Ms. Pearl Khurana, Advocates (M:9811188892) Ms. Divya Singhvi, GP for UOI (M:9599017054) SI Mohit Malik, PS-EOW, Mandir Marg, New Delhi (M:9953582192) CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA MINI PUSHKARNA, J. (ORAL): 1. The present contempt petitions have been filed alleging wilful disobedience of the judgment dated 23rd August, 2018, passed by this Court in W.P.(CRL) 1666/2013 and other connected matters, wherein, directions were issued in the following manner: “xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx” 2. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners submits that after the passing of the aforesaid judgment, the matter was taken up by the accused persons before the Supreme Court in SLP (CRL.) 8277/2018. 3. He submits that since the investigation was to be carried under the supervision of the Deputy Commissioner of Police (“DCP”), the respondent-EOW had earlier filed an application before the Supreme Court, wherein, they had sought permission to file chargesheet. He draws the attention of this Court to the application filed on behalf of the respondent-EOW, which is reproduced as under: “ ” 4. He further draws the attention of this Court to the order dated 21st January, 2025, passed by the Supreme Court, wherein, the application filed on behalf of the respondent-EOW was allowed in the following manner: “ ” 5. This Court notes that the aforesaid petition was disposed of by the Supreme Court vide order dated 28th January, 2025, wherein, it was noted as follows: “ ” 6. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners submits that the present contempt petition has been occasioned as respondent-EOW has now filed a Closure Report and no Chargesheet has been filed against the accused persons. 7. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that as long as the DCP of EOW was supervising the investigation, the respondent–EOW intended to file Chargesheet. However, instead a Closure Report has been filed, which is totally contrary to the earlier stand taken by the respondent–EOW, wherein, they intended to file Chargesheet. 8. He further submits that the Closure Report has not been filed under the Supervision of the DCP. 9. In response, learned counsel for the respondents-EOW, has handed over to this Court the original file of the EOW. 10. This Court has perused the original file maintained by the EOW. Perusal of the said file clearly shows that the Closure Report has been filed and the same has been considered by the Joint Commissioner of Police/EOW, Special Commissioner of Police/EOW, Assistant Commissioner of Police/EOW (“ACP”), Deputy Commissioner of Police-II/EOW, including other investigating officers. 11. Perusal of the original file maintained by the EOW clearly shows that the Closure Report has been recommended and endorsed by the ACP and DCP. 12. Accordingly, it is evident that the investigation has been carried out under the supervision of the DCP. 13. This Court records the statement made by learned counsel for the respondents, on instructions from Sub-Inspector Mohit Malik, Investigating Officer in the present case, that the investigation has been duly carried out under the supervision of the DCP and other senior officers in terms of the judgment passed by this Court. 14. Accordingly, no merit is found in the present petitions. 15. The present petitions are accordingly dismissed. 16. Pending applications also stand disposed of. MINI PUSHKARNA, J SEPTEMBER 8, 2026/au Page 2 of 2