W.P.(CRL) 1753/2021 Page 1 of 16

$~19

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Date of decision: 29.08.2022

+

W.P.(CRL) 1753/2021 & CRL.M.A. 14419/2021

PROFESOOR AJAY KUMAR

..... Petitioner

Through:

Mr Nishant R Katneshwarkar, Ms

Anisha Mathur, Mr Rahul Kumar, Mr

Harikesh Anirudhan and Mr Mohit

Goyal, Advs.

versus

STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR

..... Respondents

Through:

Mr Amol Sinha, ASC for State with

Mr Kshitiz Garg, Adv. for R-1.

SI Heera, PS-Maurice Nagar

Mr Gautam Khazanchi and Mr

Subham Jain, Advs. for R-2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH

:

JASMEET SINGH, J (ORAL)

1.

This is a petition seeking quashing of FIR No. 44/2014 dated

07.03.2014, under Sections 354-A/509 IPC, registered at Police Station-

Maurice Nagar, North Delhi District, New Delhi.

2.

In the FIR, it has been stated by the complainant as under:

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/003447

W.P.(CRL) 1753/2021 Page 2 of 16

(wrongly spelt as lend in the complaint) sexual remarks to me

lodged the complaint but no action has been taken by them…”

3.

Mr Katneshwarkar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has

drawn my attention to the minutes of the ICC findings/observations and

more particularly para 2, 4, 6, 6 and 7 which reads as under:

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/003447

W.P.(CRL) 1753/2021 Page 3 of 16

meetings during the pendency of the inquiry”.

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/003447

W.P.(CRL) 1753/2021 Page 4 of 16

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/003447

W.P.(CRL) 1753/2021 Page 5 of 16

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/003447

W.P.(CRL) 1753/2021 Page 6 of 16

(Annexure-XI).

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/003447

W.P.(CRL) 1753/2021 Page 7 of 16

4.

He submits that once the ICC has recommended that no case of sexual

harassment is made out against the respondent, the FIR should be quashed

and the petitioner should not be made to undergo the ordeal of trial for a

case where the ICC itself finds no case against the petitioner. He further

submits that in the appeal filed by respondent No.2, the ACC has failed to

interfere in the findings of the ICC and has dismissed the appeal filed by the

respondent No.2. He further submits that the charge-sheet supports the

petitioner. He has further stated that there is a delay in registering the FIR of

three months.

5.

The respondent No.2 has filed a response which was not on record

and a copy has been handed over in Court today.

6.

Mr Khazanchi, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 has drawn my

attention to a complaint dated 21.01.2014 and a police complaint dated

23.01.2014 to state that there was no delay in reporting the incident.

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/003447

W.P.(CRL) 1753/2021 Page 8 of 16

7.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the

documents.

8.

The law on the subject is clear. In M/s. Neeharika Infrastructe Pvt.

Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. (2021 SCC Online SC 315) para 80 it

has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court as under: