Delhi High Court
Manish Chadha & Anr. vs State ( Govt. Of Nct) & Ors. on 11 September, 2018
$~82
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on:11.09.2018
+ CRL.M.C. 4580/2018
MANISH CHADHA & ANR ..... Petitioners
versus
STATE ( GOVT OF NCT) & ORS ..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Petitioner No.1 in person.
For the Respondents : Ms.Neelam Sharma, APP for the State.
Advocate for R-2 to R-4 (appearance not given).
CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT
11.09.2018
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
1. The petitioners by this petition seek a direction to the Central
Bureau of Investigations or any other quasi judicial body other than
Delhi Police to conduct investigations. They further seek directions to
any security agency other than Delhi Police to protect the lives,
property and liberties of the petitioners. Petitioner further seeks orders
for the arrest and judicial custody of the senior police officials for
allegedly not conducting fair, proper, just and impartial investigations.
2. The allegations of the petitioners are that the petitioners are the
owners of property worth over Rs.500 crores and have a dispute with
his foster brother over said properties.
3. The allegation is that he has trespassed into the house of the
petitioners and snatched away all the title documents worth over
Rs.500 cores. It is contended by the petitioners that a complaint was
lodged with the police officials, no cognizance was taken and even
petitioner no.1 was assaulted. There are further allegations that the
foster brother has committed numerous crimes and when complaints
are made to police officers, they fail to take action.
4. Petitioner no.1 appears in person and has not been able to point
out or produce any medical report to substantiate his allegation that he
was ever assaulted. He submits that he has got the medical treatment
done privately. No documents qua the same have been produced.
5. Apart from filing copies of complaints no material has been
placed on record to substantiate the allegations made.
6. Further, from the reading of the petition and the complaints
made and the grievance raised by the petitioner do not justify
reference of the case for investigation to the Central Bureau of
Investigation. The dispute primarily pertains to be a property dispute
between petitioners and his foster brother.
7. Further, it may be noted that there are allegations made against
senior police officers and government officials. However, there is no
material produced to substantiate the allegations.
8. Further petitioners contend that they have already filed a
complaint under section 200 Cr.P.C. with the Magistrate and filing
another complaint under section 200 Cr.P.C. is going to further delay
his case. The contention that filing of a complaint under section 200
Cr PC is going to delay his case, is no ground for the petitioner not to
follow the procedure laid down by law.
9. In my view, the petitioner has neither produced any material
nor made out a case for grant of the reliefs sought. In the facts of the
present case, the prayer sought for by the petitioners cannot be
granted.
10. The petition is accordingly dismissed with liberty to the
petitioners to take appropriate remedies as may be available in law.
11. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.
SEPTEMBER 11, 2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
ab
