Ravi Prakash Gupta vs State Through: Nct Of Delhi & Ors.
2015 Latest Caselaw 563 Del

    * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                  Date of Decision: January 20, 2015

+     CRL.M.C. 4296/2014
      RAVI PRAKASH GUPTA                                ..... Petitioner
                   Through:            Mr. Chander Shekhar, Advocate

                         versus

      STATE THROUGH: NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents
                  Through: Mr. Vinod Diwakar, Additional
                            Public Prosecutor for State with
                            ASI Begraj

      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR

                         JUDGMENT

% (ORAL)

Quashing of FIR No. 131/2012, under Sections 498A/34 of the IPC, registered at police station Nanakpura, Delhi is sought in this petition on merits.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State informs that charge has been already framed and trial of this case is in progress. On behalf of respondent-State it is submitted that petitioner has an alternate and efficacious remedy to challenge order on charge.

On this aspect, pertinent observations of the Apex Court in Padal Venkata Rama Reddy Alias Ramu v. Kovvuri Satyanarayana Reddy & Ors. (2011) 12 SCC 437, are as under: -

"13. It is well settled that the inherent powers under Section 482 can be exercised only when no other remedy is

Crl.M.C.No.4296/2014 Page 1 available to the litigant and not in a situation where a specific remedy is provided by the statute. It cannot be used if it is inconsistent with specific provisions provided under the Code (vide Kavita v. State and B.S.Joshi v. State of Haryana). If an effective alternative remedy is available, the High Court will not exercise its powers under this section, specifically when the applicant may not have availed of that remedy."

Applying the dictum of above-cited decision of Apex Court to the facts of this case, this Court finds that since petitioner has an alternate and efficacious remedy available, therefore, this petition and application are disposed of with liberty to petitioner to avail of the remedy, as available in the law. Needless to say that this Court has not considered the case of the parties on merits.

                                                          (SUNIL GAUR)
                                                            JUDGE

JANUARY 20, 2015
r




Crl.M.C.No.4296/2014                                                    Page 2