Delhi High Court
Ram Lal vs State Of Nct Of Delhi And Anr on 14 September, 2015
Author: Suresh Kait
$~16
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Judgment delivered on: 14th September, 2015
+ CRL.M.C. No.2229/2015
RAM LAL ..... Petitioner
Represented by: Mr.Anurag Abhishek, Adv
with petitioner in person.
versus
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR ..... Respondents
Represented by: Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for
the State with SI
Dharmender Kumar, PS
Roop Nagar, Delhi in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)
CRL.M.C. No.2229/2015
1. By way of this petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973, petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No.518/2014
registered at Police Station Roop Nagar, Delhi, for the offence punishable
under Sections 33 of the Delhi Excise Act, 2009 against him.
2. The present petition has been filed on the ground that the complaint
made against the petitioner was a result of grudge that the complainant's
employer i.e. Roshanara Club possesses against the petitioner because he
has been vehemently exposing the illegal encroachment being made by
the Roshanara Club on the land surrounding the club and the numerous
litigations are either pending or have been decided in favour of the
petitioner and same are without any rational. It is also alleged in the
complaint that petitioner is a bad character of the area. There is no
mention of any damage done to the car in the parking area and there is no
finding of the stones which were allegedly pelted by petitioner and his
two friends. The alleged story holds further no grounds as is evident
from sequences of the events as detailed in the FIR wherein it has been
mentioned that the petitioner and his two friends ran upon on seeing the
police party. It is worth mentioning that there is only one entry and exit
point to the Roshanara Club where the police and their staff alongwith
two guards were present, but still as per the alleged story, the petitioner
and his two friends managed to evade all of them and flee away.
Accordingly, the aforesaid seems highly improbable.
3. The present FIR has been registered as an extension of case FIR
No.598/2014 dated 18.11.2014, registered at police station Subzi Mandi,
Delhi for the offences punishable under Section 392/34 of the IPC
wherein the counsel for Roshanara Club had reported a complaint for
misbehaviour in Tis Hazari Court Complex outside Court Room No.347,
which happens to be another false complaint as such offence cannot be
committed in Court premises that too at about 11.40AM when Courts are
full of advocates.
4. Apartfrom that the petitioner has given a lot of explanation and
submitted that the complaint is misuse of judicial process and has heavily
relied upon the clause No.7 of the situations as contemplated in para
No.102 by the Apex Court in the matter of State of Haryana vs Bhajan
Lal1.
(1992) Supp 1 SCC 335
5. It is pertinent to mention here that the present FIR is registered on
19.11.2014. Police on completion of investigation has filed the charge
sheet into this case on 02.06.2015 and case is pending for trial before
learned Trial Court.
6. Vide the present petition, petitioner seeks quashing of the FIR on
various grounds. However, the order on charge is yet to be passed. This
Court cannot conduct the mini trial. Therefore, I am of considered view
that present petition cannot be allowed for the reason that whatever issues
raised before this Court, may be raised by the petitioner before learned
Trial Court and learned Trial Court will consider and pass the appropriate
order accordingly. If the petitioner is still aggrieved, he may approach the
appropriate form.
7. In view of above, present petition is disposed of.
Crl.M.A.No.7870/2015 (For stay)
Dismissed as infructuous.
SURESH KAIT
(JUDGE)
SEPTEMBER 14, 2015
M
