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

2022 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 2628

HIGH COURT OF DELHI
SMT. RAJ BALA – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE (NCT) OF DELHI THROUGH ITS STANDING COUNSEL & ORS. – Respondent


J U D G M E N T

1. This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., by the applicant before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate (for short, “learned MM”) being aggrieved by the order dated 28th February, 2020, passed in C.C. No.24567/2019.

2. The petitioner had, along with her complaint, filed an application under Section 156(3) of the Code of the Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, “Cr.P.C.”) seeking directions to the police for the registration of an FIR for the commission of offences under Sections 379/420/406/465/

467/468/471/506/120B IPC against the respondents No.2 and 3 herein.

3. Mr. Shiv Ram Singh, learned counsel for petitioner, submitted that the learned MM had fallen into error in dismissing the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. on the ground that on an earlier occasion, a similar application had been dismissed. It was submitted by the learned counsel that the fact situation was different when the earlier application had been dismissed, as the petitioner was not in possession of any document to substantiate her allegations. That was also the reason why she had withdrawn her first complaint. It was submitted that in a civil suit filed by the respondent No.2, h

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top