Back
Issues Contempt Notice To Police Commissioner Over Failure To Conduct
The has taken a firm stance against alleged with its earlier directions, issuing notice on a filed against the city's top police brass. Justice Mini Pushkarna, presiding over the single-judge bench, issued the notice on a plea alleging of orders that mandated a against an inspector for in a 2016 FIR.
The Long Shadow of a 2016 FIR
The case traces back to , when an FIR was registered under at . The petitioner, Mohinder Singh, approached the High Court in 2024, complaining that the investigation had languished for years with no conclusion. In February 2025, the court expressed serious concern over the 's conduct, noting that neither a had been filed nor the investigation wrapped up.
On , the High Court directed the concerned ACP to file a and set up an inquiry into the conduct of the main , Inspector Ashish Kumar. The court specifically sought reasons for the prolonged delay. By , the Additional Standing Counsel informed the court that had been initiated against the inspector, with a promise to file a on the inquiry's progress.
Court's Directives and Alleged
According to the , however, no such was ever filed on the subsequent hearing dates—April 24, July 17, and , nor on February 17 and . Meanwhile, a was filed before the in May 2025, accompanied by an application seeking . The declined to take and instead directed the Deputy Commissioner of Police to initiate action against Inspector Ashish Kumar in accordance with law.
The petitioner alleged that neither the High Court's directions nor the magistrate's directive were complied with, prompting the contempt action against Anurag Kumar, Commissioner of Police, , and Rakesh Kumar Sharma, ACP, Kalkaji. Inspector Ashish Kumar was arrayed as a .
of FIR Does Not Absolve Duty
During the proceedings on , counsel for the respondents accepted notice and drew the court's attention to an order dated , in the main writ petition, whereby the FIR in question had been quashed. The respondents argued that with the FIR gone, the basis for the contempt proceedings may have been undermined.
However, Justice Pushkarna was not persuaded. The court observed that regardless of the , the directions for a —issued on February 14 and —remained operative. The court underscored that its earlier orders were not contingent on the survival of the FIR and that compliance with those directions was mandatory.
Court Orders , Lists for 2027
"In view of the fact that there are directions already passed by this Court as contained in the orders dated 14th February, 2025, and 24th February, 2025, let
be filed by the respondents, within a period of four weeks, from today,"
the court ordered.
The court also granted the respondents' from filing legible copies of annexures, subject to compliance within four weeks. The matter has been listed for further hearing on .
The case highlights the judiciary's insistence on accountability within the police force, even when the underlying criminal proceedings have been terminated. By refusing to let the of the FIR derail the inquiry process, the High Court has sent a clear message that against errant officers cannot be sidestepped.
