Delhi High Court
Manjari Bakshi vs State & Ors. on 23 December, 2019
$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Judgment reserved on: 25.09.2019
% Judgment delivered on: 23.12.2019
+ W.P.(CRL) 482/2019
MANJARI BAKSHI ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Rundhir, Advocate.
versus
STATE & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Jamal Akhtar and Mr.
Amanpreet Singh, Advocates.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BRIJESH SETHI
JUDGMENT
BRIJESH SETHI, J.
1. The instant petition has been filed under article 226/227 of
the constitution of India and r/w. Section 482 CrPC for quashing
the order dated 28.11.2018 passed by the Ld. ASJ-02, South East
District vide which the LD ASJ has dismissed the revision petition
moved against the order of Ld. MM-09/South-East dated
29.09.2017 vide which Ld. MM has dismissed the application of
the petitioner moved u/s. 156 (3) CrPC seeking registration of the
FIR. It is submitted that SHO PS. Defence Colony be directed to
register an FIR on the complaint of petitioner dt. 05.06.2015 on the
allegations of sexual assault, house trespass and extortion.
2. It is submitted that the petitioner, is a married woman,
residing at C-293, Defence Colony, New Delhi and is working as
Principal of Manava Bharti India Intl. School in Mussoorie,
Uttrakhand for the last many years. The accused B. S. Siddhu and
other persons have compelled the petitioner to execute property
documents in his favour. In November, 2016 accused had come to
petitioner's house at C-293, Defence Colony, New Delhi and
threatened her by showing weapon and extorted Rs. 10,00,000/-.
On the same day, the accused also sexually and physically
assaulted, wrongfully restrained and threatened the petitioner and
her other family members with dire consequences.
3. It is submitted that the petitioner had met the accused,
B.S.Sidhu in September 2013 at one Mr. Kashyap's place,
Principal Pestle Weed College, Dehradun, to take advice regarding
an incident which had taken place in her school (Manava Bharti
India Intl. School). At that time, the accused was posted as Senior
Police Official in Uttarakhand and the petitioner was totally
unaware about the character and mala-fide intention of the accused
and had started trusting him as family friend. The petitioner had
even provided him access to her property whenever he was around
or needed the same. However, after couple of years, the petitioner
suspected that the accused was indulging in suspicious activities
and was using her property for storing suspicious undisclosed
articles and also indulging in immoral and illegal acts and the
petitioner had, therefore, asked the accused to return the keys of her
property.
4. It is alleged that the accused, who was holding a senior post
police in the state of Uttrakhand had threatened to kill the
Petitioner's family. He had also threatened that he would destroy
the Petitioner's life and social reputation by implicating all her
family members in a false and frivolous case. It is further submitted
that on 29.09.2014, the petitioner had purchased a land at
Rishikesh, Mauja Gugtyani Talli. Tehsil & Paragaga Narandra
Nagar, Distt. Tehri Garhwal, which is part of land Khata No. 10
and has a total area 1.6730 hect. However, the accused by creating
terror in petitioner's mind had compelled her to execute a sale deed
in his favour at half of rate of purchase price.
5. It is further submitted that due to terror of accused, the
petitioner was compelled to execute sale deed of one property
bearing flat no. A-106, Block A-4, area 1456 sq. Ft. Situated at
Project Aloha, Rishikesh in favour of accused for a consideration
of Rs. 23,62,000/-.
6. It is next submitted that in the month of November 2016, the
accused had come to Delhi at the Petitoner's residence i.e. C-293,
Defence Colony with some police guard and hired criminals and at
gun point demanded Rs. 10 Lacs. The petitioner, had thereafter,
asked her mother in law to give him Rs. 10 Lacs. The petitioner's
mother in law had given three cheques totalling Rs. 10 lacs in
favour of one Jagdev Memorial Foundation. It is further alleged
that the accused had wrongfully restrained the Petitioner's husband
and also assaulted the petitioner with intent to create terror in the
mind of the family members. It is further alleged that the accused
also harassed the Petitioner's son, who is a Canadian citizen and
threatened him that he will put him in Jail. It is submitted that the
written complaint dated 05.06.2017 filed by the petitioner discloses
cognizable offences i.e. sexual assault, outraging the modesty of a
woman, extortion and forgery for the purpose of cheating, forgery
of valuable security and criminal intimidation. It is submitted that
the order dated 28.11.2018 passed by the Ld. ASJ is totally against
the law as the Ld. MM has dismissed the application under section
156(3) Cr.P.C. 1973 on wholly erroneous grounds of delay and on
the ground that cause of action has not arisen within the territorial
jurisdiction of Delhi Courts.
7. It is submitted that the Ld. MM and Ld. ASJ have failed to
appreciate the fact that this being a case involving sexual
harassment and assault, the delay in approaching the authorities on
the part of the petitioner is clearly explicable. It is further submitted
that the Apex Court in Ramdas & Ors. State of Maharashtra, AIR
2007 SC 155, Supreme Court has decided that mere delay in
lodging FIR is not fatal to the prosecution case. It is next submitted
that the offence which is engrafted in written complaint clearly
shows that the offence is committed within the jurisdiction of PS
Defence colony. Ld.MM and Ld. ASJ have, therefore, failed to
exercise the jurisdiction vested in them under section 156(3)
Cr.P.C. and section 397 Cr.P.C. respectively. It is, therefore,
prayed that appropriate order be passed for quashing the order
dated 28.11.2018 passed by the Ld. ASJ-02, South-East, District,
Delhi and respondents be directed to register an FIR on the
complaint of petitioner dated 05.06.2017.
8. Ld. APP for the state has submitted that a complaint from
Ms. Manjari Bakshi, Principal Manav Bharti India international
School, Mussoorie, Uttrakhand R/o C-293, Defence colony was
received by post on 07.06.2017 in Police Station Defence Colony
and the said complaint (in original) has been sent to SSP,
Mussoorie, Uttrakhand for taking necessary action vide letter No.
346/LC/SHO/DC on 19.06.2017 through proper channel. It is
submitted that the order passed by the Ld. MM as well as Ld. ASJ
are in accordance with law and the petition be, therefore,
dismissed.
9. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the
order of Ld. MM as well as Ld. ASJ. The incident mentioned by
the petitioner which is alleged to have happened within the
jurisdiction of PS Defence Colony has taken place in November,
2016. The petitioner has, however, filed a complaint in this regard
through post on 05.06.2017. There is inordinate delay in filing the
complaint and there is no explanation for the same. So far as
allegation of extortion is concerned, the Ld. MM as well as Ld.
Revisionist Court has rightly observed that no prudent man will
receive extortion money through the cheques. It was observed by
Courts below that there is no evidence which is to be collected by
the prosecution. The complainant is having all the evidence
available with her. Ld. MM is required to exercise his mind before
passing an order under Section 156(3) CrPC and has to pass the
order only if he is satisfied that the information reveals commission
of cognizable offence and also about necessity of police
investigation for digging out the evidence which is neither in
possession of the complainant nor can it be procured without the
assistance of police. In the present case since the evidence is in
possession of the complainant/ petitioner, the application of the
petitioner u/s. 156 (3) CrPC was rightly dismissed. In these
circumstances, there is no illegality or irregularity in the order
dated 28.11.2018 passed by the Ld. ASJ-02, South-East, Saket
Courts, New Delhi. The petition filed by the petitioner is, therefore,
dismissed.
BRIJESH SETHI, J
DECEMBER, 23, 2019.
