Savita @ Sakshi vs The State (Nct Of Delhi) & Ors.
2019 Latest Caselaw 2780 Del

*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                            Date of Order: May 28, 2019

+      CRL.M.C. 705/2019 & Crl.M.A. 2890/2019
       SAVITA @ SAKSHI                                  ..... Petitioner
                    Through:          Mr. Jayant Pawar, Advocate.

                         Versus

       THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ORS.         ..... Respondents
                     Through: Mr. Izhar Ahmed, Additional
                               Public Prosecutor, for respondent
                               No.1-State with SI Sikander
                               Gautam.
                               Mr. Rajesh Chugh, Advocate for
                               respondents No.2 to 4.

       CORAM:
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR

                         ORDER

(ORAL)

Petitioner is the complainant of FIR No. 587/2007, registered at police station Sarita Vihar, Delhi, whose application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for summoning the Record Keeper of Arya Samaj Vedic Temple has been dismissed although the additional charge under Section 494 IPC was framed against accused Harinder Chaudhary vide order of 17th November, 2018.

In the impugned order of 3rd December, 2018, the reason put-forth to decline petitioner's application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. is that vide

order of 17th November, 2018, right of prosecution to lead evidence was closed and the complainant cannot be permitted to fill up the lacuna.

Upon hearing and on perusal of impugned orders this Court finds that the case is at the stage of defence evidence and the examination of the Record Keeper of Arya Samaj Vedic Temple is quite relevant and necessary for just decision.

Consequently, impugned order so far as it rejects petitioner's application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. is quashed with direction to trial court to ensure that evidence of Record Keeper of Arya Samaj Vedic Temple is recorded with expedition.

With aforesaid directions, this petition and application are disposed of, while refraining to comment upon merits of this case.

(SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE MAY 28, 2019 r