IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Amit Sharma, J.
A. V. Prem Nath - Appellant
Versus
State (NCT) of Delhi) - Respondent
Crl.M.C. 4385 of 2023 & Crl.M.C. 16758 of 2023 (Stay), 24680 of 2023
Decided On : 22-01-2024
FIR Quashing - Criminal Procedure - IPC 417/419/468/471/120B.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No. 171/2023 under Sections 417/419/468/471/120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 registered at PS IP Estate and all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom.
Finding of the Court:
The court dismissed the petition, stating that no case for exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 of the CrPC for quashing of the impugned FIR is made out.
Issues: The main issue was whether the facts and circumstances of the case warranted the exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 of the CrPC for quashing of the impugned FIR.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the exercise of collecting evidence in support of the offences alleged in the present FIR was still underway and that the matter was not one where it could be safely concluded at that stage that no offence was made out.
Final Decision: The present petition was dismissed and disposed of accordingly.
JUDGMENT
Amit Sharma, J.
1. The present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (=CrPC`) seeks quashing of FIR No. 171/2023 under Sections 417/419/468/471/120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (=IPC`) registered at PS IP Estate and all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom.
Background
2. The case of the prosecution is that the present FIR was registered at the instance of one Nakul Kashyap (=the complainant`), stating that his father, late Sh. Ramesh Babu was an employee at LNJP Hospital, Delhi and he passed away in the year 2016, while he was on duty. Thereafter, the complainant applied to the Delhi Secretariat for employment on compassionate grounds, however, no action was taken in that regard. The complainant further stated that about a year and half ago, one of his relatives introduced him to an officer in the Delhi Secretariat, Shri AV Premnath, i.e., the petitioner. The petitioner assured that he is acquainted with Mr. Saurabh Bhardwaj, a minister in the ruling Government of the Aam Aadmi Party and that he will help the complainant in securing the appointment on compassionate grounds.
3. The complainant further alleged that after a few months, the petitioner called him from the mobile number 8384001874 and asked him to meet near Patiala House Courts. There, the petitioner showed him some documents and told him that he has had a conversation with Mr. Saurabh Bharwdaj and once a complaint is submitted against Sh. YVVJ Rajshekhar, Special Secretary, Services, Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (=GNCTD`), they will get him employed. The petitioner obtained the complainant`s signatures on several documents.
4. The complainant alleged that the petitioner called him after a few days and told him that his meeting has been fixed with Mr. Saurabh Bhardwaj. Thereafter, the complainant met Mr. Saurabh Bhardwaj who told him to stand by his complaint against Sh. YVVJ Rajshekhar and ensured him about his employment.
5. It was further alleged that during the enquiries conducted into the complaint submitted against Sh. YVVJ Rajshekhar, it came to the complainant`s knowledge that in the said complaint, it has been stated that Sh. YVVJ Rakshekhar made caste based remarks against the complainant, which is false. The complainant never even met Sh. YVVJ Rajshekhar. It further came to the complainant`s knowledge that a fake email-ID has been created in his name, using which complaints against Sh. YVVJ Rakshekhar have been sent to various persons.
Submissions on behalf of the Petitioner/AV Premnath
6. At the outset, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner drew the attention of this Court to the sequence of events that culminated into the registration of the present FIR:
i. On 27.05.2023, a complaint was received at PS IP Estate addressed by the complainant, against Sh. YVVJ Rajshekhar, seeking registration of an FIR against the latter under the relevant provisions of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (`SC/ST Act`) for making caste based remarks. The said complaint was stated to have been accompanied with another complaint dated 19.05.2023 against Sh. YVVJ Rajshekhar, which was addressed to Mr. Saurabh Bhardwaj, Minister of Serviced and Vigilance, GNCTD making allegations in relation to a =Cash for Compassionate Jobs Scam`.
ii. On 01.06.2023, the petitioner addressed a complaint to the Hon`ble Speaker of the Delhi Legislative Assembly seeking `immediate necessary action for CBI enquiry into fake and fraudulent OBC credentials of YVVJ Rajasekhar, Spl Secretary (Services) holding Additional Charge of Spl Secretary (Vigilance), GNCT of Delhi.'.
iii. On 07.06.2023, the complainant sent an email to various authorities, including the Commissioner of Police, Delhi Police making allegations of threats extended by Sh. YVVJ Rajshekhar and requesting for protection from his alleged abuse of authority.
iv. On 09.06.2023, the All India Congress Committee wrote a letter to t
GV Rao v. LHV Prasad and Others
Mahendra K.C. v. State of Karnataka and Anr.
Pooran Mal v. The Director of Inspection (Investigation), New Delhi and Other
State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal
State of M.P. v. Surendra Kori
State of Orissa v. Saroj Kumar Sahoo
GV Rao v. LHV Prasad and Others
Mahendra K.C. v. State of Karnataka and Anr.
Pooran Mal v. The Director of Inspection (Investigation), New Delhi and Other
State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal
Exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 of the CrPC for quashing an FIR should be sparingly and carefully exercised, and the court cannot examine disputed questions of fact at this stage.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for specific allegations justifying investigation, the caution against interfering with ongoing investigations, and the need for....
The court emphasized that successive FIRs regarding the same incident are impermissible and quashed the FIR based on concealment of previous complaints and forum shopping, affirming the requirement o....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the abuse of process of law and the exercise of inherent powers of the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the impugned FIR and all crimi....
(1) Registration of multiple FIRs assumes importance, thereby attracting issue of wreaking vengeance out of private or personal grudge.(2) Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Section 482 of....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that unsubstantiated allegations, delay in filing a complaint, and discrepancies in the complainant's documents may lead to the quashing of the ord....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.