Delhi High Court
S M Matloob vs State Govt. Of Nct Delhi & Ors. on 18 April, 2016
#23
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 18.04.2016
+ W.P.(CRL) 546/2014
S M MATLOOB ..... Petitioner
Through Petitioner in-person
versus
STATE GOVT. OF NCT DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through Mr. Rajesh Mahajan, ASC (Crl.)
SI Varun, PS Jamia Nagar
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J (ORAL)
1. The present is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying as follows:-
"1. Kindly quash the complaint case filed u/s 200 having no.
CC No. 92/1 of 2012 and proceeding arising out of the same
pending in the Court of Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate-07, same
is scheduled to be heard on 12th March 2014.
2. Kindly order for high level enquiry into the source of
income, wealth, using fake name by the complainant and his
claim as resident of I-101 - the land in question.
3. Kindly pass order to verify the ownership of I-101, E-4,
E-5 all situated in Batla House, other properties owned by the
complainant and source of income used to acquire them,
including proof of residency of the complainant at stayed plot
I-101, Batla House, Jamia Nagar, New Delhi-110025. And if
complainant is not able to prove the ownership and/or
acquired through illegal means, then kindly direct the police
to file the FIR and income tax authorities to take action
against the complainant and others.
4. Any other proper and further relief which this Hon'ble
Court may deem fit and proper also may kindly be passed in
favour of the petitioner."
2. Mr. S.M. Matloob, the petitioner who has argued his case in-person,
however, limits the relief in the present petition to prayer clause (1) i.e. to
quash the complaint case being CC No. 92/1 of 2012 pending before the
Court of Metropolitan Magistrate-07.
3. None appears on behalf of respondent no. 3/complainant in CC No.
92/1 of 2012 before this Court despite service of notice and repeated
opportunities.
4. Mr. Rajesh Mahajan, learned Addl. Standing Counsel (Crl.), on
instructions from the Investigating Officer in the subject FIR, namely, SI
Varun, Police Station- Jamia Nagar, Delhi, states that the complainant in CC
No. 92/1 of 2012 is not being represented or appearing before the Court of
learned Metropolitan Magistrate in CC No. 92/1 of 2012 since the year 2014.
5. In the present writ petition, it is alleged that respondent no.
3/complainant is a bad character of Police Station Hauz Qazi, Delhi and has
falsely instituted the subject Complaint Case against the petitioner since the
latter who is a concerned citizen and a resident of Jamia Nagar, Delhi has
been instituting proceedings against persons indulging in unauthorized
construction in the said area. In other words, it is the case of the petitioner
that the persons raising unauthorized construction are trying to intimidate
him so as to coerce him not to blow the whistle on unauthorized construction
in the Jamia Nagar area. In this behalf, it would be relevant to note that the
petitioner is a former employee of the Ministry of External Affairs (ICCR)
and Editor-in-Chief of www.aapkiawaz.com - a news portal.
6. It is also asserted that on the basis of complaints and proceedings
instituted by the petitioner, FIRs have been instituted against the people
raising unauthorized construction.
7. In view of the foregoing, it is evident that the said complaint being CC
No. 92/1 of 2012 is an attempt to muzzle the petitioner, by vested interests,
so as to coerce him to turn a blind eye to unauthorized construction and other
illegal activities in Jamia Nagar, Delhi.
8. Consequently, the said complaint being CC No. 92/1 of 2012 is an
abuse of the process of law and is, accordingly set aside and hereby quashed.
9. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J
APRIL 18, 2016
sd
