Delhi High Court

Angad Sahlot vs State & Ors on 16 March, 2020

*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%                             Judgment Reserved On: 14.01.2020
                            Judgment Pronounced On: 16.03.2020

+       W.P.(CRL) 3220/2019

        SH. ANGAD SAHLOT
                                                       ..... Petitioner
                          Through:    Mr. Rohit P. Ranjan and Mr.
                                      Prashant Jain, Advocates.

                          versus
        STATE & ORS.
                                                   ..... Respondents
                          Through:    Mr. Sanjay Lao, ASC for the
                                      State with SI Manjeet Kumar,
                                      PS Fatehpur Beri.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BRIJESH SETHI

                         JUDGMENT

BRIJESH SETHI, J

1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India r/w. Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for issuing directions

to the respondent no. l for instituting an enquiry against the

respondent no-2 & 3 i.e. the Commissioner of Police & the Dy.

Commissioner of Police (South) respectively for their failure to

book respondent no-4 i.e. Dalip Kumar, SHO PS Fatehpur Beri as

an accused and for further directions to arrest investigate and

prosecute him for openly conniving with accused persons who

committed offences of dacoity and attempt to murder and further

having failed to register a proper FIR under the appropriate sections

of law and lastly to transfer the investigation of the case to any

independent agency working independently without any interference

of Delhi police.

2. It is submitted that respondent no-4 who is the head of the

police station of the local area where the crime in question was

committed has miserably failed to book the culprits and to recover

the weapons of the offence and the fire arms looted by the culprits.

He has also failed to record the statements of the injured persons,

security guards and PSOs even after the receipt of their MLCs.

3. It is submitted that father of the petitioner had taken the Farm

bearing no-104-105, Radhy Mohan Drive New Delhi on lease with

effect from-07.09.2010 and 24.10.2011 and since then, he is in

occupation and in possession of the said farm. It is submitted that

since the execution of the lease deed dated 07.09.2010 and

24.10.2011, various understandings have been arrived at between

the father of the petitioner as well as the owners of the said farm and

based upon the aforesaid understanding the father of the petitioner

claims to be the owner of the said Farm.

4. It is further submitted that petitioner and his family members

are receiving continuous threats to their life at the hands of the

alleged owner of the Farm as well as through their goons. In fact

various complaints in this regard have been made to the SHO

concerned right from 2013 till date but he has failed to take

appropriate action. The present SHO i.e respondent no. 4 is hand in

glove with the accused persons. He has not only derelicted from

discharging his official duties rather aided and abetted the accused

persons by giving them shelter in their attempt to illegally

dispossess the petitioner and his family members from the Farm in

question by forcibly taking over the possession of the farm without

following due process of law on 16.10.2019.

5. It is further submitted that respondent no-4 has taken no

action despite receipt of more than 25 complaints. In view of

continuous threats and inaction on the part of respondent no.4

coupled with the fact that the alleged owners of the Farm intend to

illegally dispossess the petitioner and his family members from the

said Farm without following due process of law, the father of the

petitioner has filed a suit for permanent injunction before the court

of Ld. District Judge, South Saket on 23.09.2019. The defendants in

the said suit who are now accused in FIR No. 380/2019 have been

duly served and after hearing the parties, the Ld. ADJ vide his order

dated 09.10.2019 has directed the parties to maintain status quo.

6. It is further submitted by the petitioner that despite having a

restraint order from the competent court, the accused persons along

with their goons including 10 to 15 ladies armed with deadly

weapons, iron rod, lathis, Gaiti and knives arrived at the Farm house

of the petitioner along with JCB and forcibly broke the wall and

illegally entered into the Farm house of the petitioner on

16.10.2019.

7. It is further submitted that after illegally entering into the

Farm of the petitioner the accused persons committed dacoity and

damaged the entire Farm including the horses of the petitioner,

broke the CCTV cameras installed in the farm and looted the cash

and the jewelleries worth crores from the locker installed in the

Farm.

8. It is further submitted that since the intention of the accused

persons was to commit murder of the petitioner and his family

members, the accused persons finding the petitioner to be alone in

the farm attacked him with the sole motive to eliminate him and

beat him with iron rod, gaiti and knives.. Thereafter, the accused

persons forcibly took the petitioner in their vehicle with an intent to

take the petitioner at some unknown place where they can kill him.

However in the meantime the PCR van arrived at the spot and after

seeing the PCR van the accused persons threw the petitioner out

from their vehicle and ran away from the spot.

9. It is submitted that respondent no-4 being hand in glove with

the accused persons, deliberately and intentionally did not register

the FIR u/s. 307/363/364/367/395/397/398/399 IPC read with 511

and 120-B IPC. He rather registered an FIR under section

448/452/308/427/406/34 IPC only. Since the respondent no-4 has

not registered the FIR under proper sections and no proper

investigation has been carried out to catch hold of the culprits and to

recover the arms used in the crime, the petitioner filed an application

under section 156(3) CrPC upon which the LD. MM has passed an

order dt-25.10.2019 calling the status report from the respondent

no.4.

10. It is submitted that the video and the photographs clearly

show that the intention of the accused persons was to commit

murder but because of arrival of PCR van, the life of the petitioner

was saved. The nature of injury sustained on the vital parts of the

body makes out a case under Section 307 IPC which has been

deliberately diluted by the respondent no.4 while registering the FIR

and, therefore, a direction is required to be given to the investigating

officer to add section 307 of IPC in the captioned FIR. It is

submitted that bare perusal of the FIR reveals that the acts of the

accused persons squarely fall within the mischief of section 363,

364 and 365 read with 511 and 34 IPC which have deliberately and

intentionally not been added in the FIR by the respondent no.4. It is,

therefore, prayed that the investigating officer be directed to add

section 363, 364 and 367 of IPC read with 511 and 34 IPC in the

FIR.

11. It is further submitted that perusal of the contents of the FIR

reveals that allegations alleged therein also constitute offences

punishable under section 395, 397, 398 and 399 IPC which has been

deliberately and intentionally not added in the said FIR by

respondent no.4. It is, therefore, prayed that investigating officer be

directed to add section 395, 397, 398 and 399 IPC read With 34 IPC

in the FIR.

12. It is lastly prayed that investigation of the F.I.R No-380/2019

dt-16.10.2019 registered with P.S Fatehpur Beri be transferred to the

CBI or to any other independent agency having no control of Delhi

police so that a fair and impartial investigation can be carried out.

13. Ld. APP for the state on the other hand has submitted that

allegations levelled by the petitioner are false and vague. On

16.10.2019, a PCR call vide DD No. 21A was received at PS

Fatehpur Beri, Delhi mentioning that some persons have forcefully

entered in caller's farmhouse and have broken the boundary wall

with the help of JCB Machine. On reaching the spot i.e. Farm no.

104-105, Radhey Mohan Drive, Fatehpur Beri New Delhi, it was

found that the boundary wall of the said Farm House was

broken and the cars bearing No. DL lCK 5222, DL 2CV 5587, and

DL 7CG 4499 were also found in a damaged condition.

14. During investigation it was revealed that the said farmhouse

was given to Mr. Surender Sahlot (father of petitioner) on lease for a

period of 9 years by one Deepak, Giriraj and Chandrwati. Though

the lease expired on 14.09.2019, but Mr Surender Sahlot did not

vacate the said farm house. On 16.10.2019, the accused persons

forcibly entered in the farm house and the complainant Mr Angad

Sahlot and his guards/Bouncers/PSO's were brutally beaten by the

accused persons along with their associates and they sustained

several injuries. It was further revealed during investigation that the

articles kept in the farm house were also broken.

15. It is submitted that the statement of one of the injured i.e.

Angad Sahlot (petitioner) was recorded. He stated that on

16.10.2019 at around 11:45AM Deepak s/o. Dulichand, Dharmender

s/o. Giriraj, Sanjay s/o. Giriraj, Chandrwati w/o. Dulichand along

with another 10-15 persons entered inside the farm-house by

breaking the walls with the help of JCB Machine. Thereafter they

started beating the guards of the petitioner with lathis & rods and

they also attacked the petitioner with lathis and rod. Somehow the

petitioner escaped and locked himself inside a room. After that they

broke various articles and also took away expensive articles lying in

the house. After that they again attacked the petitioner and hit him

on head with rod. In the meanwhile, the PCR came and the

petitioner was taken and admitted in the hospital.

16. It is further submitted that on statement of Mr. Angad Sahlot

(petitioner), the present case vide FIR No. 380/19 dated 16.10.2019

u/s 448, 452, 308, 427, 506, 34 IPC was registered and the

investigation was taken up. The statements of other injured persons

namely, Mohit, Balwan Singh, Kameshwar Rai, Jai Kumar were

recorded u/s 161 CrPC. They also corroborated the version of the

petitioner in FIR.

17. During investigation, it was revealed that there was a dispute

between the family of the petitioner and accused persons. On

16.10.2019. the accused persons came in large number at the farm-

house and forcibly entered inside by breaking the boundary wall by

JCB Machine. After that they beat up the complainant and his

servants. They also looted all the belongings of the complainant. On

21.10.2019 one accused Ajab Singh was arrested. He disclosed that

on the night of 15.10.2019, a secret meeting of all the family

members took place at Fatehpur Beri village and they conspired to

take forceful possession of the said farm house. After his statement,

sections 147/148/149/395/397/120-B IPC were added in the present

case. Accused Ajab Singh, Nawab Khan, Noor Mohammad,

Richpal, Gopi Chand, Mahender and Dharmender have been

arrested so far in the case. Accused Dharmender is still in judicial

Custody. The NBW's have also been obtained against accused

Deepak, Mehar Singh, Sanjay Tanwar and Bijeder. Efforts are being

made to arrest the remaining accused persons.

18. I have considered the rival submissions. Perusal of the record

reveals that police is investigating the FIR and has also arrested

some of the accused persons. Hon'ble Supreme Court in case titled

"Sakiri Vasu vs. State of U.P. and others, (2008) 2 SCC 409" has

held that in case a person has a grievance that FIR has not been

registered by the police on his complaint or even after registration of

the FIR, no proper investigation is held, he can file an application

under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. before the learned Magistrate

concerned and the Learned Magistrate can direct a proper

investigation to be made and can also monitor the investigation. The

relevant para runs as follows;

11. In this connection we would like to state that if a person has a grievance that the police station is not registering his FIR under Section 154 Cr.P.C., then he can approach the Superintendent of Police under Section 154(3) Cr.P.C. by an application in writing. Even if that does not yield any satisfactory result in the sense that either the FIR is still not registered, or that even after registering it no proper investigation is held, it is open to the aggrieved person to file an application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. before the learned Magistrate concerned. If such an application under Section 156 (3) is filed before the Magistrate, the Magistrate can direct the FIR to be registered and also can direct a proper investigation to be made, in a case where, according to the aggrieved person, no proper investigation was made. The Magistrate can also under the same provision monitor the investigation to ensure a proper investigation.

19. In view of the above law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme

Court, Ld. MM u/s. 156 (3) CrPC can monitor the investigation.

According to the petitioner, the Ld. MM is already seized of the

matter. An application under Section 156(3) CrPC has already been

filed before him. Thus, there is an alternate efficacious remedy

available to the petitioner. Sections 147/148/149/395/397/120-B IPC

have been added in the present case on the basis of the statement of

co-accused Ajab Singh. Some of the accused persons have been

arrested. NBWs have also been obtained against those accused

persons who are absconding. The investigating agency is, thus,

carrying out the investigation as per law. However, if the petitioner

is still aggrieved by the fact that particular sections have not been