Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed

By:SANGEETA ANAND

Signing Date:10.01.2022

16:49:20

Page 1 of 9

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+

CRL.M.C. 1375/2021 and CRL.M.A. 8438/2021 (Stay)

Date of Decision : 21.12.2021

IN THE MATTER OF:

MANASVI VASHISTHA

..... Petitioner

Through:

Ms. Rashmi Chopra, Advocate.

versus

STATE AND ANR.

..... Respondents

Through:

Mr. Ashok Kumar Garg, APP for

State with SI Kailash, P.S. I.P. Estate

Mr. R.K. Vats, Advocate for

respondent No. 2 with Mr. Rajesh

Kumar, Asstt. Manager (HR),

IPGCL

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI

JUDGMENT

MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J. (ORAL)

1. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. on

behalf of the petitioner seeking quashing of FIR No. 103/2018 registered

under Sections 279/427 IPC at P.S. IP Estate, Delhi and the consequent

proceedings arising therefrom, including the order dated 19.10.2019 passed

by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate-03, Central, Delhi in Criminal Case

No. 11187/2019, vide which charges under Sections 279/427 IPC have

been framed against the petitioner.

2. Briefly stated, the facts involved in the case are that on 12.05.2018

an information was received in the concerned Police Station about an

accident having resulted in damage to public property. During

investigation, one Arif Khan of Raj Ghat Power House Controller Room

2021:DHC:4330

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed

By:SANGEETA ANAND

Signing Date:10.01.2022

16:49:20

Page 2 of 9

informed that a MarutiBaleno car bearing No. DL 1 CR-XXXX

(hereinafter, referred to as ‘the offending vehicle’)had rammed into the

Himadri entry gate. It was further informed that the sliding gate was found

in broken condition and at some distance, the offending vehicle was also

found in accidental condition. No injury was caused to any person and only

the gate had been damaged. At the time of the incident, one CT/GD

Gurwaiya had visited the site of accident and spotted the petitioner, who

apparently appeared to be under the influence of alcohol. A written

complaint was given by Insp.Sanjeev Kumar, Company Commander,

Rajghat Power House, wherein it was stated that he was informed of the

incident by HC Arif Khan. In pursuance of the complaint, the petitioner was

arrested on the same day, i.e., on 12.05.2018.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that from the

material collected and placed on the record alongwith the charge sheet, the

ingredients of the charged offences are not satisfied. It is submitted that

offence under Section 279 IPC is not made out against the petitioner as it

has not been stated anywhere that he was driving the offending vehicle in a

rash and negligent manner as to endanger human life, or to be likely to

cause hurt or injury to any other person.

Learned counsel further submitted that the offence punishable under

Section 427 IPC is also not made out against the petitioner, as he is not

alleged to have committed any mischief with the intention to cause loss or

damage. In support of her contentions, learned counsel has placed reliance

on the decision in State of Rajasthan v. Nauratan Mal reported as 2001

SCC OnLine Raj 291.

Lastly, it has been contended that although quashing of FIR is sought

on merits, the petitioner, without prejudice to his rights and contentions, is

ready and willing to tender an unconditional apology to IPGCL as well as

2021:DHC:4330

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed

By:SANGEETA ANAND

Signing Date:10.01.2022

16:49:20

Page 3 of 9

compensate for any damage caused to its property.

4. Learned APP for the State has submitted that as per the allegations in

the FIR, CT/GD Gurwaiya had reached the spot of incident and found the

Himadri gate as well as the offending vehicle in a damaged condition.

Further, the petitioner was seen stepping out of the offending vehicle and

he reportedly appeared to be under th