Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Rishabh Kumar vs the State & Ors.

Rishabh Kumar vs The State & Ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Orders Decided May 29, 2026
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1265921

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Delhi Orders High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
W.P.(CRL)/1737/2026
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Rishabh Kumar

Advocate Mr. Irfan Ahmad, Mr. Yakub Raza, Ms. Kanishka Negi, Ms. Harshita

Respondent

The State & Ors.

Advocate Mr. Sanjay Lao, Mr. Abhinav Kumar, Mr. Aryan Sachdeva

Excerpt

* in the high court of delhi at new delhi+ w.p.(crl) 1737/2026& crl.m.a. 17505/2026 & crl.m.a. rishabh kumar .....petitioner through: mr. irfan ahmad, mr. yakub raza, ms. kanishka negi, ms. harshita, advocates along with petitioner.versusthe state & ors. .....respondent through: mr. sanjay lao, sc (crl.) with mr. abhinav kumar, mr. aryan sachdeva, advoates along with si shivam sahu and si vinay kumar.coram:hon'ble mr. justice manoj jainorder% 29.05.20261. petitioner has some apprehension to his life at the hands of respondent no.5 and seeks adequate police protection.2. admittedly, coercive process has already been issued against him andwhen the matter was taken up by learned trial court on 23.05.2026, the petitioner appeared through video-conferencing and now he has been directed to appear before the court on 01.06.2026.3. learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is, merely, facing prosecution in a criminal complaint filed under section 138 of negotiable instruments act, 1881 and there is no other case against him.4. learned standing counsel (crl.) submits that, though, as per theaverments in the petition, there are warrants against him but in case, he apprehends any threat from any corner whatsoever, he can always contact the concerned sho for appropriate remedial action.5. after hearing arguments for some time, learned counsel for thew.p.(crl) 1737/2026 1 petitioner does not press the present petition and states that he would advise his client to appear before the learned trial court, physically, on the abovesaid date.6. present petition stands disposed of, as not pressed.7. pending applications also stand disposed of. manoj jain, j may 29, 2026/sw/sa w.p.(crl) 1737/2026 2

Full Judgment

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 1737/2026& CRL.M.A. 17505/2026 & CRL.M.A. RISHABH KUMAR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Irfan Ahmad, Mr. Yakub Raza, Ms. Kanishka Negi, Ms. Harshita, Advocates along with petitioner.

versus

THE STATE & ORS. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjay Lao, SC (Crl.) with Mr. Abhinav Kumar, Mr. Aryan Sachdeva, Advoates along with SI Shivam Sahu and SI Vinay Kumar.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN

ORDER

% 29.05.2026

1. Petitioner has some apprehension to his life at the hands of respondent No.5 and seeks adequate police protection.

2. Admittedly, coercive process has already been issued against him and

when the matter was taken up by learned Trial Court on 23.05.2026, the petitioner appeared through video-conferencing and now he has been directed to appear before the Court on 01.06.2026.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is, merely, facing prosecution in a criminal complaint filed under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and there is no other case against him.

4. Learned Standing Counsel (Crl.) submits that, though, as per the

averments in the petition, there are warrants against him but in case, he apprehends any threat from any corner whatsoever, he can always contact the concerned SHO for appropriate remedial action.

5. After hearing arguments for some time, learned counsel for the

W.P.(CRL) 1737/2026 1 petitioner does not press the present petition and states that he would advise his client to appear before the learned Trial Court, physically, on the abovesaid date.

6. Present petition stands disposed of, as not pressed.

7. Pending applications also stand disposed of. MANOJ JAIN, J MAY 29, 2026/sw/sa W.P.(CRL) 1737/2026 2

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial