The contemnor has been appearing before the Delhi High Court only virtually, from abroad, while ignoring its directions to appear in person, and non-bailable warrants have not secured his presence. The Court has now escalated: a Red Corner Notice through INTERPOL, a request to the Ministry of External Affairs to alert the authorities in the country where his internet address was traced, and cyber-tracing of the location from which he logs in to each hearing.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has directed the Central Bureau of Investigation to issue a Red Corner Notice through INTERPOL against a contemnor who has remained outside the country and failed to appear before it despite the issuance of non-bailable warrants, in a suo motu criminal contempt matter [Court On Its Own Motion v. Adeeshwar Singhal].
A Division Bench of Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Ravinder Dudeja passed the directions after being informed that the respondent’s whereabouts were not known and that a Look Out Circular already issued might not, by itself, secure his presence.
The proceedings
The respondent appeared virtually before the Court and, as the order records, again made unfounded allegations. The Central Government Standing Counsel informed the Court, on instructions, that the respondent had last travelled out of the country in August 2024 to Italy and had not returned to India since, that his present whereabouts were not known, and that his Indian passport had expired in August 2025. A Look Out Circular had been issued against him, but, the Court noted, it might not by itself be sufficient to secure his presence despite the non-bailable warrants.
On that footing, the Court directed the CBI to issue a Red Corner Notice through INTERPOL against the respondent to secure his presence in compliance with its orders, including the non-bailable warrants.
The IP-address trail
The Court recorded that, by a report of May 2026 from the Station House Officer, Police Station Anand Vihar, the IP address from which the respondent had joined the proceedings on an earlier date was found to belong to Gilroy, California, in the United States. It accordingly directed the Ministry of External Affairs to inform the concerned authorities in the United States about the non-bailable warrants issued against the respondent, the expiry of his Indian passport, and his IP address, so that efforts could be made to trace him and produce him before the Court.
Since the respondent had joined the day’s proceedings virtually as well, the Court directed the Cyber Cell of the Delhi Police to make inquiries regarding the IP address used, and to intimate it to the Central Government Standing Counsel so that the Ministry of External Affairs could take appropriate action; the Registry was directed to supply the details of that IP address to the Additional Public Prosecutor.
Further directions
The Court again directed the respondent to appear in person on the next date, ordered that the court proceedings continue to be recorded and preserved, and listed the matter for reporting compliance on December 9, 2026.
Why it matters
The order illustrates the graded machinery a court can deploy when a person subject to its process places himself beyond reach by remaining abroad. The sequence, personal-appearance directions, then non-bailable warrants, then a Look Out Circular, and now a Red Corner Notice through INTERPOL coupled with a request routed through the Ministry of External Affairs, reflects an escalation from domestic coercive measures to instruments of international cooperation, resorted to when the earlier steps do not produce the person.
A Red Corner Notice is a request to law-enforcement agencies worldwide to locate and provisionally detain a person pending extradition or similar action; it is not an international arrest warrant, and any action on it depends on the laws of the country where the person is found. The parallel direction to the Ministry of External Affairs, and the use of the traced IP address, are aimed at the same end of locating the respondent and bringing him before the Court, while the direction to preserve the recordings keeps a record of the proceedings he continues to join remotely.
The proceedings remain at the stage of securing the respondent’s presence; the contempt itself is yet to be finally adjudicated, and the allegations he is recorded to have made have not been gone into on merits. The matter is listed for reporting compliance in December, by when the steps the Court has directed, the notice, the diplomatic communication and the cyber inquiries, are to be acted upon and placed before it.
Case Title: Court On Its Own Motion v. Adeeshwar Singhal [Cont.Cas.(Crl) 10/2025 and 5/2026]
Bench: Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Ravinder Dudeja, High Court of Delhi at New Delhi
Date of Order: September 18, 2026
Appearances: Dr. Amit George, Amicus Curiae, with Advocates. Central Government Standing Counsel Amit Tiwari, with Advocates, for the Union.
Status: CBI directed to issue a Red Corner Notice through INTERPOL; MEA to inform US authorities; Cyber Cell to trace the IP address. Contempt not finally adjudicated. Listed for compliance on December 9, 2026.