Niyam v2 is live — start for just ₹100 — 200 credits to try

december 2025

Delhi High Court · 2025-12-20

NAVNEET KUMAR & ANR. vs STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.

Citation / case number
CRL.M.C.-6540/2025 2025:DHC:11673
Court
Delhi High Court
Petitioner
NAVNEET KUMAR & ANR.
Respondent
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: 20.12.2025 ,,,,,,,,,, + CRL.M.C. 6540/2025 & CRL.M.A. 27538/2025 EXEMPTION, CRL.M.A. 27539/2025 EXEMPTION NAVNEET KUMAR & ANR .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Sanjay Padam Jain, Advocates with petitioners through VC. versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. … Respondents Through: Mr. Satinder Singh Bawa, APP with SI Amit, PS Cyber, SI Jitender Kumar, PS-Nangloi. Respondent No. 2 through VC. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA JUDGMENT(ORAL) RAVINDER DUDEJA, J. 1. This is a petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, seeking quashing of FIR No. 158/2019, dated 27.03.2019, registered at P.S Nangloi, Delhi under Sections 406/420/464/467/468/471/120B/34 IPC and all proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of settlement between the parties. 2. The factual matrix giving rise to the instant case is that the complainant/respondent no.2 was induced by the accused persons, directors and associates of M/s Next Style Corporation Pvt. Ltd., to CRL.M.C. 6540/2025 Page 1 of 4 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VAISHALI PRUTHI Signing Date:20.12.2025 16:33:10 invest Rs. 52,00,000/- in their solar project on the false assurance of high returns. The accused executed an MOU and showed forged project documents and fabricated bank statements to the complainant and issued post-dated cheques which were dishonoured due to signature mismatch. It was later discovered that the project was non- existent, the documents were forged, and the invested money was siphoned off to various beneficiaries in criminal conspiracy. FIR No. 158/2019 under Section 406/420/464/467/468/471/120B/34 IPC was registered at the instance of respondent No.2. Subsequently Chargesheet was filed. 3. It has been submitted t

NAVNEET KUMAR & ANR. vs STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. · Niyam