Delhi High Court
Sanjay Arora vs State (Nct Of Delhi) And Anr. on 21 December, 2015
Author: Suresh Kait
$~42
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Judgment delivered on:21st December, 2015
+ CRL.M.C. No.5198/2015
SANJAY ARORA ..... Petitioner
Represented by: Mr. Prashant Mendiratta,
Mr. Anirudh K. Mudgal and
Mr. Siddhartha Basu, Advocates
with Petitioner in person.
Versus
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) AND ANR. ..... Respondents
Represented by: Mr.Amit Chadha, Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State with
Inspector Afzar Raza, EOW.
Respondent No.2 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)
Crl.M.A.18728/2015 (for exemption)
Exemptions allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Accordingly, the application is allowed.
CRL.M.C. No.5198/2015
1. Vide the present petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973, petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No.246/2013
registered with the Economic Offences Wing, Police Station Mandir
Marg, New Delhi, for the offences punishable under Sections
420/467/468/471/406/120B IPC and the consequential proceedings
emanating therefrom against him.
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that
the aforesaid case was registered on 10.12.2013 against the petitioner
pursuant to the complaint made by the complainant/respondent No.2 in
the month of June, 2010. Since then more than five years have passed and
meanwhile, the Investigating Authority has issued enquiry letters to the
petitioner asking for documents and clarifications as under:-
(i) Letter of enquiry dated 02.11.2010
(ii) Letter of enquiry dated 16.12.2010
(iii) Notice under Section 160 Cr.P.C. dated 10.11.2014
(iv) Notice under Section 160 Cr.P.C. dated 19.01.2015
(v) Notice under Section 160/91 Cr.P.C. dated 24.04.2015
(vi) Notice under Section 160 Cr.P.C. dated 03.09.2015
(vii) Notice under Section 160/91 Cr.P.C. dated 21.10.2015.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite having
replied to the said notices issued by the Investigating Authority, till date
the respondent No.1 has not concluded the investigation.
4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the
State, on instructions from Inspector Afzar Raza, Investigating Officer of
the case, submits that the documents received from the petitioner were
sent for examination to FSL in the year 2011, however, report thereof has
been received in the year 2015 and that is inconclusive too regarding the
age of ink and paper are concerned. Accordingly, the Investigating
Authority is in the process of sending the documents for further
examination to other Laboratories and also in the process of sending the
documents to the Panel Chartered Accountant for its opinion. Thus, the
Investigating Authority is in the process of investigation and the same will
be expedited.
5. Keeping in view the fact that respondent No.2/complainant had
made complaint in the month of June, 2010 and thereafter, the FIR was
lodged on 10.12.2013 and since then more than two years have passed,
however, the investigation is not complete as yet. Therefore, without
passing any order in the present petition, I hereby direct the Investigating
Authority to expedite the investigation in this case and file report
accordingly.
6. With these observations, the present petition is disposed of.
Crl.M.A.18727/2015 (for stay)
With the disposal of the petition itself, the instant application has
become infructuous. The same is dismissed accordingly.
SURESH KAIT
(JUDGE)
DECEMBER 21, 2015
sb
