SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Del) 512

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Sudhir Kumar Jain, J.
Bhagwan Das Vasudeva & Ors. - Petitioners
Vs.
The State (Nct Of Delhi) - Respondent
CRL.M.C. 2657 of 2019 & CRL.M.A. 2677 of 2020
Decided On : 22-07-2022

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Kailash Vasdev, Senior Advocate, Mr. Umrao Singh Rawat, Advocate along with Ms. Nayantara & Ms. Manya Jha, Advocates.
For the Respondent: Mr. Ashok Kumar Garg, APP for State SI Neeraj Sharma, P.S-Vikaspuri.

Point of Law: Section 95 of IPC deals with act causing harm and discards conviction of accused in trivial matters which are petty in nature and no man of prudence and ordinary nature would seek to complain against such acts before court of law.

Headnote:

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 482 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 341/323/34 and 95 - Wrongful restraint – Nature of injuries - Seeking quash of FIR - Alleged that petitioner no1 has put up a ramp in front of gate of his house and respondent no 2 was abused and slept by petitioner no 1 when he was talking with petitioner no.1 and when he was going back to his house then petitioner nos.2 and 3 who are son and nephew of petitioner no1, stopped and picked up a quarrel with him. Petitioner no.2 also pushed wife of respondent when she came at spot and as a result of which she fell down and got injured. Respondent no 2 also stated these persons obstructed him as well as wife of respondent and caused injuries to both of them - Plea of petitioners that petitioners no 2 & 3 were not present at spot is a matter of trial and at this their absence cannot be presumed. Trial court has rightly framed charges as also observed by revisional court. There is no merit in present petition and FIR including impugned order cannot be quashed. (Para 21)

Finding of the court: In facts and circumstances of case at this stage it cannot be said that acts alleged against petitioners are trivial in nature against which complainant cannot complain - Nature of injuries and harm caused to respondent no 2 and his wife can only be ascertained after conclusion of trial and after appreciating evidence to be led by prosecution and at this stage premature evaluation of evidence likely to be led by prosecution cannot be done - Protection of section 95 of IPC is not available to petitioners under given facts and circumstances of case - There is no force in arguments that petitioner no 1 being old person cannot defend trial arising out of FIR due to physical weakness particularly when petitioner no 1 himself is pursuing trial arising out of cross FIR bearing and disputes subject matter of FIR is of private nature - Trial court has rightly framed charges as also observed by revisional court - There is no merit in the present petition and FIR including impugned order cannot be quashed.

Result: Petition dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

1. The present petition is filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “the Code”) for quashing of FIR bearing no.194/2015 registered under sections 341/323/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as “IPC”) at P.S. Vikas Puri, New Delhi with all consequential proceedings including impugned judgment dated 24.09.2018 passed by the Court of Ms. Smita Garg, Additional Sessions Judge, West, Fast Track Court, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in Criminal Revision no.485/2017 titled as Bhagwan Dass Vasudeva & Ors. V. State (NCT of Delhi).

2. The respondent no 2 was ordered to be impleaded vide order dated 17.05.2017. The respondent no.2 stated to be expired and this Court vide order dated 18.02.2020 directed the concerned Investigating Officer to submit the names of the Legal Representatives of the respondent no 2 and in pursuance of the order dated 18.02.2020, Raghu Nath Singh Rathor, father and Renu Singh Rathor, Wife of the complainant appeared before this Court on 11.03.2022.

3. FIR bearing no. 194/2015 dated 23.02.2015 was got registered under sections 341/323/34 IPC at P.S. Vikas Puri, Delhi on the basis of the complaint made by the respondent no 2 pertaining to incident happened on 22.02.2015 wherein the petitioners were implicated. The charge sheet in pursuance of FIR bearing no 194/2015was filed after completion of the investigation and the court of Metropolitan MagistrateM-05 (West), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “the trial court”) vide order dated 17.05.2017 ordered for framing of the charges for offences punishable under sections 323/341/34 IPC against the petitioners. The petitioners being aggrieved by the order dated 17.05.2017 preferred Criminal Revision Petition bearing no.485/2017 titled as Bhagwan Dass Vasudev & Ors. V. The State (NCT of Delhi) which was dismissed vide order dated 24.09.2018 (hereinafter referred to as “the impugned order”) passed by the Court of Ms. Smita Garg, ASJ/FTC (e-Court), West, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “the revisional court”).

4. A cross FIR bearing no. 193/2015 dated 23.02.2015 was also registered under sections 341/323 IPC at P.S. Vikas Puri on the basis of complaint made by the petitioner no.1 wherein the respondent no.2 (since deceased) was implicated.

5. The respondent no 2 in FIR bearing no 194/2015 alleged that the petitioner no1 on 22.02.2015 has put up a ramp in front of the gate of his house and at about 10:30 pm the respondent no 2 was abused and slept by the petitioner no1 when he was talking with the petitioner no.1 and when he was going back to his house then the petitioner nos.2 and 3 who are the son and nephew of the petitioner no1, stopped and picked up a quarrel with him. The petitioner no.2 also pushed Renu Singh wife of the respondent when she came at the spot and as a result of which she fell down and got injured. The respondent no 2 also stated these persons obstructed him as well as Renu Singh and caused injuries to both of them. The respondent no 2 and Renu Singh were medically examined vide ME No 2744/15 and MLC No1530/15 at Deen Dayal Upadhyay Hospital respectively and their medical examination reflected that they received simple blunt injury and blunt injury respectively. Thereafter on the basis of medical report, FIR bearing no194/2015 under sections 341/323/34 IPC was registered at P.S. Vikas Puri, New Delhi.

6. The petitioner no.1 in cross FIR bearing no193/2015 alleged that he made a ramp outside his flat and the respondent no 2 on 22.02.2015 at about 10:30 pm came to his flat and picked up a quarrel abused the petitioner no.1 and when the petitioner no1 was returning to his house, the respondent no 2 obstructed and slept him several times. The statement of the petitioner no1 was recorded by the police and was sent for medical examination in DDU Hospital which reflected that the petitioner no 1 received simple blunt injury. Thereafter, FIR bearing no.193/2015 dated 2

          Click Here to Read the rest of this document
          1
          2
          3
          4
          5
          6
          7
          8
          9
          10
          11
          SupremeToday Portrait Ad
          supreme today icon
          logo-black

          An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

          Please visit our Training & Support
          Center or Contact Us for assistance

          qr

          Scan Me!

          India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

          For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

          whatsapp-icon Back to top