Delhi High Court
Nxxxx Xxxxx vs State(Nct Of Delhi) & Anr. & Ors on 14 May, 2025
$~71
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 14.05.2025
+ CRL.M.C. 3376/2025 & CRL.M.A. 14854/2025
NXXXX XXXXX .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Shyam Arora, Advocate
versus
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Nawal Kishore Jha, APP for State
with W/SI Sangam Yadav, PS Mayur
Vihar
CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
1. It is considered necessary, so the prayer clause of the present petition
is extracted below:
"1) Pass appropriate order/direction to the respondent No.1 to
conduct a further and fair investigation and take appropriate
decisions by law as expeditiously as possible, or transfer the
investigation of the complaint to any other independent agency for
committing the offence by the Respondent No. 2.
2) To set aside the Impugned Judgement/ Order vide dated 02.12.2024
passed by The Ld. ASJ, Swati Katiyar (Special FTC) East, KKD
Courts, New Delhi in Cr. Rev. P. No. 332/23 Under Section 397 of
CrPC in FIR No. 209/2023 frivolous and vexatious dismissal of
Protest Petition against Police Report Under Section 173, CrPC,
1973.
3) Pass any such other and further relief(s) or order as the Court may
deem fit and proper, considering the facts and circumstances of the
present case".
CRL.M.C. 3376/2025 Page 1 of 5 pages
GIRISH Digitally signed by GIRISH
KATHPALIA
+05'30'
2. At the outset, learned counsel for petitioner submits that he does not
press for prayer clause (2). Therefore, prayer clause (2) is dropped.
3. I have heard learned counsel for petitioner.
4. It is the admitted position that on a complaint lodged by the petitioner,
FIR No. 209/2023 of PS Mayur Vihar, Phase-I, Delhi for offence under
Section 376 IPC was registered and after investigation, chargesheet for
offence under Section 376/377 IPC was filed against the present respondent
no. 2. The present petitioner, being complainant de facto filed a protest
petition, which was dismissed by the magisterial court vide order dated
06.11.2023. The said order dated 06.11.2023 was assailed by the present
petitioner through revision petition under Section 397 CrPC. Vide order
dated 02.12.2024, the said revision petition was dismissed by the court of
learned Additional Sessions Judge. As mentioned above, the petitioner opts
not to challenge order dated 02.12.2024.
5. On being called upon to address in view of lack of specificity of the
prayer clause, learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the only prayer is
for directions to the Investigating Officer to fairly investigate the case since
he has not examined certain important witnesses and has not seized mobile
phone of the present respondent no. 2.
CRL.M.C. 3376/2025 Page 2 of 5 pages
GIRISH Digitally signed by GIRISH
KATHPALIA
+05'30'
6. It appears that the FIR No. 209/2023 was registered by the local
police on the basis of complaint of the present petitioner, alleging that the
present respondent no. 2 met her on 14.12.2021 and they developed
friendship which followed a love affair and subsequently on the basis of a
false promise to marry, the present respondent no. 2 established physical
relations with her on multiple occasions, but finally he refused to marry her.
7. As reflected from detailed judgment of the learned revisional court,
the real grievance of the petitioner under the garb of seeking "fair
investigation" is that the Investigating Officer instead of arresting the
present respondent no. 2 gave him notice under Section 41A CrPC to join
the investigation. In the revisional judgment, the learned Additional
Sessions Judge has elucidated the legal position on this issue, taking note of
the fact that the allegations of the alleged sexual assault pertain to the period
from July 2022 to 08.02.2023, while the complaint was lodged on
15.05.2023 and upon service of notice under Section 41A CrPC, the present
respondent no.2 joined the investigation and cooperated with the same so he
was bound down and not arrested.
8. Not only this, it also appears from record that the present respondent
no. 2 applied for grant of anticipatory bail and after hearing both sides
including the present petitioner, the learned Court of Sessions granted
anticipatory bail to the present respondent no. 2. That being so, the
CRL.M.C. 3376/2025 Page 3 of 5 pages
GIRISH Digitally signed by GIRISH
KATHPALIA
+05'30'
grievance of the petitioner as regards decision of the Investigating Officer
not to arrest the respondent no. 2 pales into insignificance.
9. Even the contention of learned counsel for petitioner that the
Investigating Officer did not examine certain witnesses was considered and
elaborately discussed by the revisional court, observing that the petitioner
failed to mention role of those witnesses in the alleged incidents of rape; and
rather in her statement under Section 164 CrPC, the petitioner stated that out
of shame, she did not disclose about the incidents to her mother also.
10. Similarly, contention of learned counsel for petitioner that the
Investigating Officer did not seize mobile phone of respondent no. 2
containing Whatsapp chats, pictures and call recordings was considered and
elaborately discussed by the revisional court observing that in her complaint
and statement under Section 164 CrPC, the petitioner did not allege that
respondent no. 2 was in possession of any such photographs, videos or any
other objectionable material.
11. The learned revisional court discussed threadbare all contentions of
the petitioner on the basis whereof she had filed a protest petition, which got
dismissed. To reiterate, the petitioner opts not to challenge the said order of
the revisional court.
CRL.M.C. 3376/2025 Page 4 of 5 pages
GIRISH Digitally signed by GIRISH
KATHPALIA
+05'30'
12. In the above backdrop, the only prayer of petitioner is for directions to
the Investigating Officer to conduct further and fair investigation. I find no
reason to invoke inherent powers to issue any such directions. Remedy for
the petitioner lies elsewhere.
13. The petition along with accompanying application stand dismissed.
GIRISH GIRISH KATHPALIA
KATHPALIA Date: 2025.05.14
18:01:18 +05'30'
GIRISH KATHPALIA
(JUDGE)
MAY 14, 2025
'as'
CRL.M.C. 3376/2025 Page 5 of 5 pages
