View
217
Download
2
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Statement of the accused under Section 313 of Cr. P.C .
r/w Section 281 of Cr. P.C.
FIR No.31/2013
PS – Parliament Street
U/s – 279/337/304A IPC
State Vs. Jasdeep Singh
16.03.2016
Statement of accused Jasdeep Singh S/o Sh. J. S. Bhatia.
Without Oath
Q. It is alleged against you that on 16.02.2013 at about 07:20 am at crossing R. P.
Road, Janpath, New Delhi, you were driving Hyundai Getz car bearing registration
number HR26Y7022 in a rash and negligent manner so as to endanger human life
and personal safety of others and while so driving, you hit your car against one
TSR/auto bearing registration number DL1RL1993 and caused simple injuries on
the person of Mangal Singh and further caused death of Divya Wadhavan. What do
you have to say?
A. It is incorrect.
Q. It is in evidence against you that PW1 Ct. Ravinder has deposed against you
that on 16.02.2013, he does not remember the D.D. Number, but Duty Officer
instructed him to report before ASI Hari Singh at Janpath Crossing Red Light in
relation to call of one accident. He went at the spot where he met ASI Hari Singh
there. They found one car bearing registration number HR26Y7022 and one bearing
registration number TSR DL – 1R – 1993 in accidental condition. The driver of
abovementioned car Jasdeep was also present at the spot and he informed them that
one lady has been injured due to collusion between abovementioned car and TSR.
Accused also informed them that lady had been shifted to RML Hospital by a private
vehicle. ASI Hari Singh left him at the spot for preservation of the spot and he went
to RML Hospital. After some time, ASI Hari Singh came back at the spot and handed
over him Rukka of present case for registration of FIR. He went to PS for registration
.....................Contd/
: 2 :
of FIR, got FIR registered and after registration of FIR, came back at the
spot alongwith copy of FIR and original Rukka and handed over the same to him for
further handing over to ASI Hari Singh as further investigation of case was marked to
him. IO seized offending vehicle bearing registration number HR26Y7022 vide
memo Ex.PW1/A, seized TSR vide memo Ex.PW1/B, RC and insurance certificate of
offending vehicle vide memos Ex.PW1/C and DL of accused vide memo Ex.PW1/D,
arrested accused vide memo Ex.PW1/E and conducted his personal search. Vehicles
were deposited in malkhana. Accused was released on bail. IO recorded his
statement. He correctly identified you and photographs of vehicles as mark 'P1' to
mark 'P5'. What do you have to say?
A. It is incorrect.
Q. It is in evidence against you that PW2 Mangal Singh has deposed against you
that he does not remember the date of incident, but incident took place in the year
2013 and at that time, he was plying TSR on Delhi roads. On the day of incident in
morning hours, one lady passenger boarded his TSR from Inderpuri for dropping the
said passenger to Pragati Maidan. When, he reached at the crossing of Janpath Road
and Bhagawan Dass Road at about 6 – 7 am, while he was crossing the junction,
suddenly some vehicle hit his TSR and due to which, he got injured and fell
unconscious. After 24 hours, when he gained his consciousness, he was admitted in
hospital. Thereafter, police came to hospital and inquired him about the said incident
and further recorded his statement. What do you have to say?
A. It is incorrect.
Q. Why this case has been registered against you?
A. I have been falsely implicated in this case.
Q. Why witnesses have deposed against you?
A. I cannot say anything.
Q. Do you want to say anything more?
..................Contd/
: 3 :
A. I am innocent. I have not committed the crime alleged against me.
Q. Do you want to lead DE?
A. No.
RO&AC
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
Certificate
Certified that above statement has been recorded by me of the accused in
his/her presence and bearing and contains full and true account of the statement made
by him/her and has been read over to him/her and admitted to be correct.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
FIR No.31/2013
PS – Parliament Street
U/s – 279/337/304A IPC
State Vs. Jasdeep Singh
16.03.2016
Present : Ld. APP for the State.
Sh. Sanjay Bhargav, Ld. Counsel alongwith accused Jasdeep Singh.
Sh. Mangal Singh in person as summoned witness.
Today, witness Mangal Singh examined as PW2, crossexamined by Ld. APP
for the State, not crossexamined by the accused person(s) despite opportunity given,
accordingly, discharged.
In matter of “Satish Mehra Vs. Delhi Administration & Ors.” 1996, JCC 07,
Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has been observed that :
“in a case, where, there is no prospect of the case ending in conviction, the valuable time of the Court should not be wasted for holding a trial only for the purpose of formally completing the procedure to pronounce the conclusion on the future date.”
In this matter, PW2 has not supported the case of the prosecution and nothing
supporting the case of prosecution came out in his skillful crossexamination done by Ld.
APP for the State. Perusal of the case file reveals that the present witness/PW2 is the only
eyewitness to the incident. In view of the above judgment, abovesaid facts and
circumstances and further since only eyewitness has not supported the case of the
prosecution, therefore, further prosecution evidence is hereby closed as no useful purpose
would be served by continuing with the trial of this case as remaining witnesses are either
formal witnesses or official witnesses.
Statement of accused under Section 313 of Cr. P.C. r/w 281 of Cr. P.C.
recorded separately. It is submitted by the accused that he does not want to lead defence
evidence.
Final arguments from both sides heard.
Vide separate judgment pronounced today, accused namely Jasdeep Singh is
hereby acquitted for offences punishable under Section 279/337/304A IPC.
Jasdeep Singh is directed to furnish Bail Bond and Surety Bond in the sum of
Rs.10,000/ each under Section 437A of Cr. P.C.
....................Contd/
: 2 :
Jasdeep Singh furnished his Personal Bond and Surety Bond under Section
437A of Cr. P.C. in the sum of Rs.10,000/ each. Same are considered, accepted and shall
remain in force for six months. Original FDR of surety earlier submitted is retained for
purposes of present bail bond and surety bond.
Let, notice be issued to the LRs of the deceased for providing compensation
from DLSA as per victim compensation scheme on NDOH.
Put up the matter for further proceedings on 29.03.2016.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
FIR No.388/2014
PS Vasant Vihar
U/s – 411 IPC
State Vs. Gurpreet Singh
16.03.2016
CHARGE
I, Harvinder Singh, M.M., Delhi, do hereby frame the following charge against you
Gurpreet Singh S/o Balwant Singh as under :
It is alleged against you that on 19.08.2014 at unknown time at Khokha Market, T
point, Saket, New Delhi, you were found in possession of one mobile phone make Samsung,
color black and metallic having IMEI number 359516043651068 which you
knowingly/dishonestly retained or received or having reason to believe that the same was
stolen property and thus thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 411 IPC
within the cognizance of this Court.
I hereby direct you to be tried by this Court for the abovesaid offence.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/02.03.2016Certified that the Charge has been read over and explained to the accused persons in
their vernacular language, who is questioned as under:
Q: Have you understood the charge framed against you?
A: Yes sir.
Q: Do you plead guilty or claim trial?
A: I do not plead guilty and claim trial.
RO&AC (HARVINDER SINGH)
M.M.06/PHC (NDD), New Delhi/02.03.2016
FIR No.388/2014
PS Vasant Vihar
U/s – 411 IPC
State Vs. Gurpreet Singh
16.03.2016
Present : Ld. APP for the State.
Accused Gurpreet Singh in person.
The accused person seeks an adjournment in this matter stating that his
counsel is not available for today.
Request declined in view of the fact that on LDOH, adjournment was given on
same ground and he was afforded an opportunity to engage a counsel for himself or to apply
for LAC, but, he fails to do so.
The accused person submits that he/she has received complete and legible set
of documents.
Matter qua charge considered. There is primafacie case against the accused
person(s) for offence punishable under Section 411 IPC only. Charge under Section 411 IPC
framed against the accused to which he/she pleaded not guilty and claimed the trial.
Let, witnesses complainant and MHC(M) alongwith case property be
summoned for evidence on NDOH.
Put up the matter for PE on 09.08.2016.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
Babli Kumari Vs. Rajan Kumar Jha
C.C.No.191/01/14
PS Vasant Vihar
16.03.2016
Present : None for the complainant.
Perusal of the case file reveals that none is appearing on behalf of the
complainant for last many dates of hearing and today also none is present on behalf of the
complainant to assist the Court.
It appears that complainant is not interested in prosecution of this matter.
In these facts and circumstances, this complaint stands dismissed for non
prosecution and for nonappearance of the complainant.
File be consigned to Record Room after due compliance.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
Ashim Kumar Sen Gupta Vs. Siddharta Sen Gupta etc.
C.C.No.284/01/16
PS – South Campus
16.03.2016
Present : Sh. Ravi Mehta, Ld. Counsel for the complainant.
Complainant is absent.
IO SI Pratap Singh is also absent.
Sh. Vikas Chhabra, Ld. Counsel for the accused.
Ld. Counsel for the complainant filed application on behalf of complainant for
exemption from personal appearance of the complainant. Considered and allowed for today
only.
It is submitted by Ld. Counsel for the accused that the complainant is
threatening him upon him mobile phone though he is doing his duties only.
Ld. Counsel for the complainant is advised to counsel his client that such type
of conduct is not warranted on part of parties.
Ld. Counsel for the accused is free to pursue his legal remedies as he may
deem fit.
Let, status report be called from IO of NCR No.07/2016 of PS South Campus
on 16.05.2016.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
Maheshwari Vs. Kuldeep
C.C.No.1030/15
16.03.2016
Present : None for the complainant.
Summons issued against the accused Kuldeep received back with the report
“refused to receive by family members of accused”.
Issue B/W against the accused Kuldeep in sum of Rs.5,000/ through SHO
concerned, returnable to this Court on 01.07.2016.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
Rakesh Aggarwal Vs. Gaurav Tandon
C.C.No.1182/01/15
PS – Great Kailash
16.03.2016
Statement of complainant Rakesh Aggarwal S/o Late Sh. Amar Singh Aggarwal.
On SA
I am complainant in this case. I have voluntarily compromised/compounded
the offence qua Section 138 N. I. Act with the accused as full and final settlement and I have
received a sum of Rs.50,000/ in cash from the accused today as compensation amount. No
more dues is pending against the accused. I may be allowed to compound the matter qua
Section 138 N. I. Act with the accused. I shall be bound by my statement.
RO&AC
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
Rakesh Aggarwal Vs. Gaurav Tandon
C.C.No.1182/01/15
PS – Great Kailash
16.03.2016
Present : Complainant Rakesh Aggarwal in person.
Sh. Amit Anand, Ld. Counsel alongwith accused Gaurav Tandon.
With the judicial intervention of the Court, the matter stands compromised
between the parties in the sum of Rs.50,000/ qua full and final settlement. Complainant
submits that in lieu of compromise, he has received a sum of Rs.50,000/ in cash as full and
final payment from the accused today in the Court and he does not want to proceed with this
case further. Permission is sought by complainant to compound the offence punishable under
Section 138 N. I. Act. His statement in this regard is recorded separately.
Permission qua compounding of offence punishable under Section 138 N. I.
Act is granted and in view of statement of complainant, offence punishable under Section 138
N. I. Act alleged against the accused is compounded and accused is hereby acquitted for
offence punishable under Section 138 N. I. Act.
Bail bonds are cancelled and sureties are discharged. Original documents of
Gaurav Tandon and his surety, if any be released to them after cancellation of endorsement, if
any against acknowledgment as per rules.
File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
Announced in the open Courton March 16, 2016.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
Nilendra Pratap Singh Vs. Mani Shankar Aiyar etc.
C.C.No.1098/01/15
PS – Parliament Street
16.03.2016
Present : Sh. Shalender Pratap Singh, Ld. Counsel alongwith complainant.
At request, put up the matter for consideration on 10.06.2016.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
Rational Business Corporation Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Anand Rai
C.C.No.580/01/15
16.03.2016
Present : Sh. Rajiv Ranjan Kumar, Ld. Counsel for the complainant.
Complainant is absent.
Sh. Sudhir Kumar, Proxy counsel alongwith employee of the accused Sh.
Bhagwati Prasad.
Accused is also absent.
Ld. Counsel for the accused moved an application on behalf of accused for
exemption from personal appearance of the accused. Considered and allowed for today only.
Today, employee of the accused made payment of Rs.1,00,000/ in cash to the
Ld. Counsel for the accused.
On request, put up the matter for remaining payment of settlement amount on
29.03.2016.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
Savitri Devi Vs. Y. Khan etc.
C.C.No.933/01/15
16.03.2016
Present : None for the complainant.
Sh. Sushil Kumar, Ld. Counsel for the accused.
Accused is absent.
Ld. Counsel for the accused moved an application on behalf of accused for
exemption from personal appearance of the accused. Considered and allowed for today only.
Put up the matter for appearance of complainant/appearance of accused/further
proceedings on 20.07.2016.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
FIR No.1395/2015
PS – Vasant Vihar
U/s – 354D/376/313/341/342/506/509 IPC
State Vs. Vijesh Kumar Sangwan
16.03.2016
Present : Ld. APP for the State.
Sh. Arun, Ld. Counsel alongwith accused Vijesh Kumar Sangwan.
The accused person submits that he has received complete and legible set of
documents alongwith echallan.
Since, offence(s) under consideration is/are triable by Ld. Sessions Court,
therefore, the present matter is committed to the Court of Sessions for trial in accordance
with law and is sent to Ld. District and Sessions Judge, NDD District, Patiala House Courts,
New Delhi for proper orders for 19.03.2016.
The accused person is directed to remain present in person before the Court of
Ld. District and Sessions Judge, NDD District, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi on date
already fixed i.e. 19.03.2016.
Ahlmad is directed to send the file complete in all respects well in time.
Ld. Public Prosecutor be notified of the committal of the case.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
Religare Securities Ltd. Vs. ______________
C.C.No.______________
PS – K. G. Marg
16.03.2016
Present : Sh. Abhishek Saran, Ld. Counsel for the complainant.
AR of the complainant is absent.
On oral request of Ld. Counsel for the complainant, AR of the complainant is
exempted from personal appearance for today only.
Put up the matter for appearance of AR of the complainant/PSE on 01.08.2016.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
FIR No.61/2012
PS – South Campus
16.03.2016
Present : Ld. APP for the State.
Sh. Ramesh Kumar, Ld. Counsel alongwith accused.
Summons issued to the witness SI Kuldeep Yadav received back served with
the request for providing some other date. Request as sought granted and he be summoned
afresh for evidence on NDOH.
Put up the matter for PE on 21.04.2016.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
FIR No.162/2012
PS Vasant Vihar
16.03.2016
Present : Ld. APP for the State.
Accused Sanjay Puri is absent.
Death verification report of the accused has been received from where it is
clear that accused has expired on 26.11.2015 and verification officer has also verified the
death certificate of the accused from the hospital where he died ultimately.
In view of the same, this Court is satisfied that accused has already expired,
accordingly, proceedings stands abated against the accused. Documents of the surety of
accused, if any, be released after cancellation of endorsement, if any against acknowledgment
as per rules.
File be consigned to Record Room after due compliance.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
Chander Pal Gautam Vs. A. S. Bedi etc.
C.C.No.618/01/15
PS – Vasant Vihar
16.03.2016
Present : Sh. C. S. Gautam, Ld. Counsel alongwith complainant.
IO HC Sanjay Kumar.
Today, matter is fixed for consideration on application under Section 156 (3)
Cr. P.C.
This Court has considered the ATR already filed by IO and perusal of the
same reveals that the ATR is silent regarding the allegations of the paragraph no.07 of the
complaint regarding theft of golden articles, cash and documents, therefore, IO is directed to
file fresh ATR on abovesaid aspects on NDOH.
Put up the matter for consideration on 17.05.2016.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
FIR No.11/2015
PS – North Avenue
U/s – 279/337 IPC & 146/196 M. V. Act
State Vs. Lalit Singh
16.03.2016
Today IO of this case filed fresh charge sheet under Section 279/337 IPC &
146/196 M. V. Act. It be checked and registered.
Present : Ld. APP for the State.
Complainant/injured Ashif Ali in person.
Accused Lalit Singh in person.
Challan filed by IO. Perused.
I take cognizance of the abovesaid offences.
Today, copy of challan supplied to the accused person(s). The accused person
submits that he/she/they has/have received complete and legible set of documents.
On inquiry from both sides, it appears that there are ample chances of
settlement in this matter.
Let, the file be put up the matter before Mediation Center today itself at 02:30
pm and returnable to this Court after process of mediation at 03:30 pm.
Parties are directed to appear in person before Mediation Center on time fixed.
Ahlmad is directed to send the file complete in all respects to the Mediation
Center well in time.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
Ahmer Khan Vs. Smriti Z. Irani
C.C.No.343/01/15
PS – Parliament Street
16.03.2016
Present : Sh. K. K. Manon, Ld. Sr. Counsel alongwith Sh. Rajesh Inamdar and Ms. Anjali
Rajput, Ld. Counsels alongwith complainant.
Sh. Sudhir Sharma, SDM, Office of Election Commission and Sh. O. P. Tanwar,
Assistant Registrar, School of Open Learning, University of Delhi present as summoned witnesses.
Sh. Sudhir Sharma submits that though they received summons in this matter, but
no details have been provided in the summons, so he has not been able to bring relevant record on
behalf for their department.
At this stage, Ld. Counsels for the complainant supplied copies of relevant record
which they want to get summoned from the office of Election Commission of India to Sh. Sudhir
Sharma, SDM, Office of Election Commission.
Sh. O. P. Tanwar, Assistant Registrar submits that they have also received summons
in this matter, but, no details were provided in the summons so they have no idea what exact record
need to be produced, however, he has brought some of records available in sealed envelops.
At this stage, Ld. Counsels for the complainant supplied copies of relevant record
which they want to get summoned from University of Delhi to Sh. O. P. Tanwar, Assistant
Registrar, School of Open Learning, University of Delhi.
Sh. O. P. Tanwar has also submitted relevant certified copy of application form for
admission for B. Com (Honors) academic session 1993 – 1994, one certified copy of result of B.
Com (Honors – I) pertaining to year 1993 – 1994 and one certified copy of enrollment/admission
form for academic session 2013 – 2014 of B. A. (Political Science) on record.
Present witnesses are bound down to produce relevant records (copies of which
supplied by complainant side today) for evidence on NDOH and further Sh. O. P. Tanwar is also
directed to bring the originals of certified copies submitted today on NDOH. Witnesses are asked,
if they want diet money, however, they have politely declined for the same.
Put up the matter for PSE on 03.05.2016. Dasti copy of order be given to Sh.
Sudhir Sharma, SDM, Office of Election Commission and Sh. O. P. Tanwar, Assistant Registrar,
School of Open Learning, University of Delhi as prayed for.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
FIR No.789/2015
PS – Vasant Vihar
U/s – 279 IPC & 185 M. V. Act
State Vs. Devender Rathore
16.03.2016
Today IO of this case filed fresh charge sheet under Section 279 IPC & 185 M.
V. Act. It be checked and registered.
Present : Ld. APP for the State.
IO ASI Dindayal Sharma in person.
IO of this case today filed fresh charge sheet under Section 279 IPC & 185 M.
V. Act. Same is perused and I take cognizance of offence(s).
Accused Devender Rathore is stated to be on police bail.
Issue summons against the accused Devender Rathore and notice to his surety
for appearance through IO of this case on NDOH.
Put up the matter for further proceedings on 24.06.2016.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
FIR No.1306/2015
PS Vasant Vihar
U/s – 188 IPC
State Vs. Dinesh Dass
16.03.2016
Fresh challan under Section 188 IPC filed by IO. It be checked and registered.
Present : Ld. APP for the State.
IO HC Giriraj Prasad in person.
Accused Dinesh Dass in person.
Challan filed by IO. Perused.
I take cognizance of the abovesaid offence.
Today, copy of challan supplied to the accused person(s). The accused person
submits that he/she/they has/have received complete and legible set of documents.
At this stage, accused has moved an application under Section 265 (B) of Cr.
P.C. accompanied with an affidavit.
In view of the same, let, the matter be put up before Monthly National Lok
Adalat to be held on 09.04.2016.
IO is directed to remain present in person alongwith previous conviction
record of the accused in same offence, if any before the National Lok Adalat to be held on
09.04.2016.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
FIR No.685/2015
PS – Vasant Vihar
U/s – 363 IPC
State Vs. Cancellation Report
16.03.2016
Today IO of this case filed fresh cancellation report under Section 363 IPC. It
be checked and registered.
Present : Ld. APP for the State.
IO ASI Dindayal Sharma in person.
IO of this case today filed fresh cancellation report under Section 363 IPC.
Same is perused.
Let, notices be issued to complainant and both victims through complainant
for consideration on 02.04.2016.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
FIR No.137/2016
PS South Campus
16.03.2016
This is an application for releasing of articles as mentioned in the application
alongwith bag.
Present : Ld. APP for the State.
Applicant Virender Jitchhibba in person.
IO has filed his reply. Same is taken on record wherein it has been submitted
that articles have been recovered in abandoned condition on Tpoint of Ramnathbij Marg –
Vande Matram Marg.
Instead of releasing the article on superdari, this Court is of the view that the
article has to be released as per directions of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in matter of
“Manjit Singh Vs. State” in Crl. M.C. No. 4485/2013 dated 10.09.2014.
Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in abovesaid judgment/order while relying
upon the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in matter of “Sunderbhai Ambalal
Desai Vs. State of Gujarat”, AIR 2003 SUPREME COURT 638, “General Insurance
Council & Ors. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors.” Writ Petition (C) No.14 of 2008
decided on 19.04.2010 and “Basavva Kom Dyamangouda Patil Vs. State of Mysore”, (1977)
4 SCC 358 has held :
“59. The valuable articles seized by the police may be released to the person, who , in the opinion of the court, is lawfully entitled to claim such as the complainant at whose house theft, robbery or dacoity has taken place, after preparing detailed panchnama of such articles, taking photographs of such articles and a security bond.
60. The photographs of such articles should be attested or countersigned by the complainant, accused as well as by the person to whom the custody is handed over. Whenever necessary, the court may get the jewellery articles valued from a government approved valuer.
61. The actual production of the valuable articles during the trial should not be insisted upon and the photographs along with the panchnama should suffice for the purposes of evidence.
Considering the facts and circumstances and law laid down by Hon'ble High
Court of Delhi, since accused in this matter is not known, articles i.e. Pan Card, ID Card,
PNB Bank Cheque Books, some key, license of M. Chhibba Electronic Corporation, stamps
and letter head alongwith photocopy of some papers as per seizure memo be released to the
applicant by IO on furnishing security bond as per valuation report of articles of applicant
....................Contd/
: 2 :
and after preparation of panchnama, even without signatures of any accused
and taking photographs of articles as per above directions of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in
above cited paragraphs. Panchnama, photographs, valuation report and security bond shall
be filed alongwith final report. Panchnama, photographs, valuation report and security bond
shall be sufficient evidence in trial against any accused, if someone is put to trial for the
commission of theft of the said articles as per judgment of “Manjit Singh Vs. State” in Crl.
M.C. No.4485/2013 dated 10.09.2014 passed by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi and “General
Insurance Council & Ors. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors.” Writ Petition (C) No.14 of
2008 decided on 19.04.2010 passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. Dasti copy of order
be given as prayed for.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
FIR No.790/2015
PS – Vasant Vihar
16.03.2016
Statement of accused Sansar S/o Sh. Ram Singh Yadav.
Without Oath
I plead guilty to the offence under Section 279 IPC. The allegations leveled
against me in the charge sheet are correct. I am making this statement voluntarily and
without any pressure or undue influence. I have understood the consequences of my
statement and the punishment prescribed for the offence.
RO&AC
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
FIR No.790/2015PS - Vasant Vihar
U/s - 279 IPCState Vs. Sansar
16.03.2016
Fresh challan under Section 279 IPC filed by IO. It be checked and registered.
Present : Ld. APP for the State.
IO ASI Dindayal Sharma in person.
Accused Sansar in person.
Challan filed by IO. Perused.
I take cognizance of the above-said offences.
Today the copy of the challan supplied to the accused person. The accused
person submits that he/she has received complete and legible set of documents.
At this stage, accused person submits that he wants to plead guilty in this
matter. I have explained consequences of plea of guilt. Yet, the accused reiterates his plea of
guilt. His statement to that effect recorded separately.
Plea of guilt qua Section 279 IPC of the accused is accepted as this Court is
satisfied that the same has been made by the accused voluntarily and after understanding the
ingredients of the offence. Accordingly, accused person stands convicted for the offence
under Section 279 IPC.
ORDER ON SENTENCE
Ld. APP for the State submits that convict be sentenced as per law.
On the other hand, convict prays for a lenient view stating that he is a poor
person and is a sole bread earner of his family.
I have heard both sides on the point of sentence.
Since, the accused has come forward to admit his guilt on the very first day
and has not taken any chance of trial and thus has saved the valuable time of this Court and
the treasury from unnecessary burden, therefore, such type of persons who genuinely admit
their mistake are entitled for lenient view as harsh punishment to such people would
discourage who genuinely want to admit their mistake and therefore, in totality of
circumstances, convict person is hereby sentenced to imprisonment till rising of this Court
and further to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- for the offence under Section 279 IPC. Fine deposited.
Be awaited till 04:00 pm.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016...................Contd/-
: 2 :
At 04:00 pm.
Present : Same as above.
Convict has already served the sentence.
Bail bond and surety bond, if any are cancelled and discharged.
Superdarinama, if any stands cancelled or vehicle if detained be release to rightful claimant.
Original documents of convict and his surety, if any, be returned to him after cancellation of
endorsement. A copy of the order on sentence be supplied to the convict free of costs.
File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
Announced in the open Courton March 16, 2016.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
M/s Ish Travel & Tours Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/s My Agent Travel & Tourism
C.C.No.572/01/16
16.03.2016
Statement of Sh. Raman Jain, AR of the complainant.
On SA
I tender into evidence my affidavit Ex.CW1/A as my presummoning
evidence which bears my signatures at point 'A' and 'B'. I rely on documents Ex.CW1/1 to
Ex.CW1/8 in presummoning evidence. We do not press our complaint against accused
no.01.
I hereby close my presummoning evidence.
RO&AC (HARVINDER SINGH)
M.M.06/PHC (NDD), New Delhi/16.03.2016
M/s Ish Travel & Tours Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/s My Agent Travel & Tourism
C.C.No.572/01/16
16.03.2016
Fresh case received by way of assignment. It be checked and registered.
Present : Sh. Sushil Kumar Sharma, Ld. Counsel alongwith AR of the complainant Sh.
Raman Jain.
This is complaint filed for offence punishable under Section 138 N. I. Act. I
take cognizance of said offence.
The AR of complainant has tendered has affidavit Ex.CW1/A in pre
summoning evidence alongwith documents and has deposed that they do not press their
complaint against accused no.01. He has closed his presummoning evidence.
Arguments on point of summoning heard and documents perused. I have also
gone through the impugned cheque, bank return memo, legal demand notice and other
documents placed on record. I have also checked the mode of the sending of demand notice.
The complaint is filed within the period of limitation.
In view of the statement of AR of complainant, name of proposed accused
no.01 stands deleted from array of accused persons.
There are sufficient grounds for proceedings against proposed accused no.02
being partner/authorized signatory for offence punishable under Section 138 N. I. Act, 1881.
Hence, issue summons against the accused no.02 on P.F./R.C. for 24.10.2016.
The complainant can provide email address of accused person(s), if any for service. The
process server is directed to serve the summons by way of affixation, if premises found
closed or same could not be served personally or on any adult male member. An
endorsement be also made that if application for compounding at first hearing is made the
court may pass appropriate orders at the earlier as per judgment of Damodar S. Prabhu cited
as (2010) 5 SCC 663. Complainant is directed to file PF and take steps within 20 days
including providing copy(ies) of complaint otherwise the complaint may be dismissed U/s
204(4) Cr. P.C.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
M/s Akzo Nobel India Limited Vs. M/s Alam Trading Company etc.
C.C.No.571/01/16
16.03.2016
Statement of Sh. Bharat Lal Juyal, AR of the complainant.
On SA
I tender into evidence my affidavit Ex.CW1/A as my presummoning
evidence which bears my signatures at point 'A' and 'B'. I rely on documents Ex.CW1/1 to
Ex.CW1/9 in presummoning evidence. We do not press our complaint against accused
no.01.
I hereby close my presummoning evidence.
RO&AC (HARVINDER SINGH)
M.M.06/PHC (NDD), New Delhi/16.03.2016
M/s Akzo Nobel India Limited Vs. M/s Alam Trading Company etc.
C.C.No.571/01/16
16.03.2016
Fresh case received by way of assignment. It be checked and registered.
Present : Sh. Nitesh, Ld. Counsel alongwith AR of complainant Sh. Bharat Lal Juyal.
This is complaint filed for offence punishable under Section 138 N. I. Act. I
take cognizance of said offence.
The AR of complainant has tendered has affidavit Ex.CW1/A in pre
summoning evidence alongwith documents and has deposed that they do not press their
complaint against accused no.01. He has closed his presummoning evidence.
Arguments on point of summoning heard and documents perused. I have also
gone through the impugned cheque, bank return memo, legal demand notice and other
documents placed on record. I have also checked the mode of the sending of demand notice.
The complaint is filed within the period of limitation.
In view of the statement of AR of complainant, name of proposed accused
no.01 stands deleted from array of accused persons.
There are sufficient grounds for proceedings against proposed accused no.02
being partner/authorized signatory for offence punishable under Section 138 N. I. Act, 1881.
Hence, issue summons against the accused no.02 on P.F./R.C. for 17.10.2016.
The complainant can provide email address of accused person(s), if any for service. The
process server is directed to serve the summons by way of affixation, if premises found
closed or same could not be served personally or on any adult male member. An
endorsement be also made that if application for compounding at first hearing is made the
court may pass appropriate orders at the earlier as per judgment of Damodar S. Prabhu cited
as (2010) 5 SCC 663. Complainant is directed to file PF and take steps within 20 days
including providing copy(ies) of complaint otherwise the complaint may be dismissed U/s
204(4) Cr. P.C.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
M/s Akzo Nobel India Limited Vs. __________________
C.C.No.______________(02)
16.03.2016
Statement of Sh. Bharat Lal Juyal, AR of the complainant.
On SA
I tender into evidence my affidavit Ex.CW1/1 as my presummoning evidence
which bears my signatures at point 'A' and 'B'. I rely on documents Ex.CW1/A to
Ex.CW1/G in presummoning evidence.
I hereby close my presummoning evidence.
RO&AC (HARVINDER SINGH)
M.M.06/PHC (NDD), New Delhi/16.03.2016
M/s Akzo Nobel India Limited Vs. __________________
C.C.No.______________(02)
16.03.2016
Fresh case received by way of assignment. It be checked and registered.
Present : Sh. Santosh Manglam, Ld. Counsel alongwith AR of the complainant.
This is complaint filed for offence punishable under Section 138 N. I. Act. I
take cognizance of said offence.
The complainant has tendered his affidavit Ex.CW1/1 in presummoning
evidence alongwith documents. He has closed his presummoning evidence.
Arguments on point of summoning heard and documents perused. I have also
gone through the impugned cheuqe, bank return memo, legal demand notice and other
documents placed on record. I have also checked the mode of the sending of demand notice.
The complaint is filed within the period of limitation.
There are sufficient grounds for proceeding further against accused person(s)
for offence punishable under Section 138 N. I. Act.
Hence, issue summons against the accused person(s) on P.F./R.C. for
17.10.2016. The complainant can provide email address of accused person(s), if any for
service. The process server is directed to serve the summons by way of affixation, if
premises found closed or same could not be served personally or on any adult male member.
An endorsement be also made that if application for compounding at first hearing is made the
court may pass appropriate orders at the earlier as per judgment of Damodar S. Prabhu cited
as (2010) 5 SCC 663. Complainant is directed to file PF and take steps within 15 days
including providing copy(ies) of complaint otherwise the complaint may be dismissed U/s
204(4) Cr. P.C.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
FIR No.307/2016
PS – Vasant Vihar
16.03.2016
Statement of Sh. Vishal Singh, Ld. Counsel for the applicant.
At Bar
I hereby voluntarily withdraw the present application. I may be allowed for
the same. I shall be bound by my statement.
RO&AC
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
M/s Salora International Ltd. Vs. ______________
C.C.No.______________
16.03.2016
Fresh case received by way of transfer. It be checked and registered.
Present : Sh. Ajay Malviya, Ld. Counsel for the complainant.
AR of the complainant is absent.
On oral request of Ld. Counsel for the complainant, AR of the complainant is
exempted from personal appearance for today only.
Put up the matter for appearance of AR of the complainant/further proceedings
on 10.08.2016.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
FIR No.307/2016
PS – Vasant Vihar
16.03.2016
Present : Ld. APP for the State.
ASI Surender on behalf of IO SI Ranveer Singh.
Sh. Vishal Singh, Ld. Counsel for the applicant Devender Singh.
This is an application for grant of bail of the applicant.
Reply of IO to the application of applicant received.
At this stage, Ld. Counsel for the applicant submits that he wants to withdraw
the present application. His statement to that effect recorded separately.
In view of the statement of Ld. Counsel for the applicant, present application
stands dismissed as withdrawn. Dasti copy of order be given as prayed for.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
M/s Intec Capital Vs. ______________
C.C.No.______________
16.03.2016
Fresh case received by way of transfer. It be checked and registered.
Present : Sh. Avnish Mishra, Proxy counsel for the complainant.
AR of the complainant is absent.
On oral request of Ld. Counsel for the complainant, AR of the complainant is
exempted from personal appearance for today only.
Put up the matter for appearance of AR of the complainant/further proceedings
on 12.08.2016.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
FIR No.67/2016
PS - South Campus
16.03.2016
Present : Ld. APP for the State.
Ld. Counsel for the applicant/accused Prince Sharma.
This is an application of the applicant/accused for release of articles seized
during jamatalashi as mentioned in the application.
Reply of IO to the application of applicant received.
I have considered the submissions made in the application and reply of IO.
In view of the same, the application is accordingly, allowed. MHC(M)
concerned is directed to release the seized articles of jamatalashi as per jamatalashi memo
to the applicant/accused as per rules which are not part of case property or which are not
proceeds of crime or required for investigation after consultation with IO. Dasti copy of
order be given as prayed for.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
FIR No.42/2016
PS - South Campus
16.03.2016
Present : Ld. APP for the State.
Sh. T. A. Siddiqui, Ld. Counsel for the accused/applicant Vikas.
This is 2nd application for grant of bail filed under Section 437 of Cr. P.C.
wherein it has been submitted that this is a false case and no offence is made out against the
applicant. It is further submitted in the application that no more required for any custodial
interrogation and therefore, should be grant bail in this matter.
Submissions from both sides heard.
In view of the fact that no fresh grounds have been pleaded in the present
application, therefore, this Court does not deem it appropriate to grant bail to the accused
person at this stage, accordingly, bail application of the applicant/accused is hereby rejected.
Dasti copy of order be given as prayed for.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
FIR No.347/2016
PS – Vasant Vihar
16.03.2016
Present : Ld. APP for the State.
IO SI Arvind Kumar.
Sh. Pramod Tyagi, Ld. Counsel for the applicant Arun.
This is an application for grant of bail filed under Section 437 of Cr. P.C.
wherein it has been submitted that this is a false case and no offence is made out against the
applicant. It is further submitted in the application that he is no more required for any
custodial interrogation and therefore, should be grant bail in this matter.
IO has filed his reply wherein it has been submitted that even present address
of the accused could not be verified as he has not given his present address.
At this stage, copy of present address submitted on behalf of accused.
Let, fresh report be filed by IO for consideration on 21.03.2016. Copy of fresh
address submitted today be sent to IO for verification.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
FIR No.305/2006
PS – Sarita Vihar
16.03.2016
Present : Ld. APP for the State.
Accused Nisha Anna Chacko, Shyni Varghese and Sherin Sara Chacko are
already PO/absconders in this case.
Remaining accused persons are already on permanent exemption through their
respective Ld. Counsels.
Sh. S. K. Saxena and Ms. Manisha Sharma, Ld. Counsels for accused no.01,
02, 03, 04, 07, 08, 09, 10 and 12.
Sh. Surya Prakash Khatri, Ld. Counsel for the accused no.13.
Inspector Madanjeet Singh in person as summoned witness. No time left
today for recording evidence in this matter, therefore, witness is discharged unexamined
today.
Put up the matter for PE on date already fixed i.e. 17.03.2016.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
M/s Gulati Paints and Hardware Vs. Yogesh Sharma
C.C.No.403/01/16
16.03.2016
Fresh case received by way of transfer. It be checked and registered.
Present : Sh. Sanjay Diwan, Ld. Counsel alongwith complainant.
Before transfer of the present matter, summoning order was already passed.
Issue summons against the accused person(s) on P.F./R.C. for 08.06.2016.
Complainant is directed to file PF and take steps within 15 days including providing copy(ies)
of complaint otherwise the complaint may be dismissed U/s 204(4) Cr. P.C.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
Ashutosh Bansal Vs. All India Council of Technical Education
C.C.No.568/01/16
PS – Parliament Street
16.03.2016
Fresh application received by way of assignment. It be checked and registered.
Present : Complainant Ashutosh Bansal in person.
At request, put up the matter for consideration on application on 14.04.2016.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
FIR No.245/2015
PS – Tilak Marg
16.03.2016
Present : Ld. APP for the State.
IO SI Kishan Lal.
Sh. Arvind Khasna, Ld. Counsel alongwith accused.
Notice issued to the complainant received back served by way of affixation,
however, he is absent.
It appears that the complainant is not interested in compounding of matter by
way of pleabargaining.
In view of the same, present matter is sent back to the concerned Court
through the Court of Ld. CMM (NDD), PHC for 23.03.2016.
Accused person(s) is/are direct to appear before the Court of Ld. CMM
(NDD), PHC on 23.03.2016.
Ahlmad is directed to send the file complete in all respects to the Court of Ld.
ACMM (West) well in time.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
FIR No.548/2015
PS – Vasant Vihar
U/s – 379/511/34 IPC
State Vs. Sushil Kumar
16.03.2016
Today IO of this case filed fresh charge sheet under Section 379/511/34 IPC. It
be checked and registered.
Present : Ld. APP for the State.
IO HC Sanjay Kumar in person.
IO of this case today filed fresh charge sheet under Section 379/511/34 IPC.
Same is perused and I take cognizance of offence(s).
Accused Sushil Kumar is stated to be on Court bail. Accused 'X' is stated to
be juvenile in this matter
Issue summons against the accused Sushil Kumar and notice to his surety for
appearance through IO of this case on NDOH.
Put up the matter for further proceedings on 30.06.2016.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
Usha International Ltd. Vs. A. K. Aggarwal
C.C.No.853/01/15
16.03.2016
File taken up today on request of Ld. Counsel for the complainant.
Present : Sh. Abhay Singh, Ld. Counsel for the complainant.
Sh. Deepak, Ahlmad of this Court.
It is submitted by Ahlmad of this Court that file could not be taken up on
28.02.2016 being holiday for Sunday and further due to rush of files.
At this stage, it is submitted by Ld. Counsel for the complainant that AR of the
complainant is not available today and seeks an adjournment in this matter.
On oral request of Ld. Counsel for the complainant, AR of the complainant is
exempted from personal appearance for today only.
Put up the matter for appearance of AR of the complainant/consideration on
11.08.2016.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
FIR No.11/2015
PS – North Avenue
U/s – 279/337 IPC & 146/196 M. V. Act
State Vs. Lalit Singh
16.03.2016
Statement of injured Ashif Ali S/o Late Sh. Mohd. Budha Khan.
On SA
I am injured in this case. I have voluntarily compromised/compounded the
offence qua Section 337 IPC with the accused before Mediation Cell and I have received a
sum of Rs.25,000/ in cash from the accused today as compensation amount. I may be
allowed to compound the matter qua Section 337 IPC with the accused. I shall be bound by
my statement.
RO&AC
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
FIR No.11/2015
PS – North Avenue
U/s – 279/337 IPC & 146/196 M. V. Act
State Vs. Lalit Singh
16.03.2016
Statement of accused Lalit Singh S/o Sh. Sunder Singh.
Without Oath
I plead guilty to the offences under Section 279 IPC & 146/196 M. V. Act.
The allegations leveled against me in the charge sheet are correct. I am making this statement
voluntarily and without any pressure or undue influence. I have understood the consequences
of my statement and the punishment prescribed for the offences.
RO&AC
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
FIR No.11/2015
PS – North Avenue
U/s – 279/337 IPC & 146/196 M. V. Act
State Vs. Lalit Singh
16.03.2016
Matter received back from Mediation Cell with the report “Settled”.
Present : Ld. APP for the State.
IO SI Ved Prakash in person.
Complainant/injured Ashif Ali in person.
Accused Lalit Singh in person.
The matter has been compromised between the injured and accused before
Mediation Cell qua Section 337 IPC in the sum of Rs.25,000/. Injured submits that in lieu
of compromise, he has received a sum of Rs.25,000/ in cash as compensation from the
accused today in the Court as per settlement before Mediation Cell and he does not want to
proceed with this case further. Permission is sought by injured to compound the offence
punishable under Section 337 IPC. His statement in this regard is recorded separately.
Permission qua compounding of offence punishable under Section 337 IPC is
granted and in view of statement of injured, offence punishable under Section 337 IPC
alleged against the accused is compounded and accused stands acquitted for offence
punishable under Section 337 IPC.
Accused person also states that he wishes to plead guilty to the offences
punishable under Section 279 IPC & 146/196 M. V. Act. I have explained consequences of
plea of guilt. Yet, the accused reiterates his plea of guilt.
Plea of guilt qua Section 279 IPC & 146/196 M. V. Act of the accused is
accepted as this Court is satisfied that the same has been made by the accused voluntarily and
after understanding the ingredients of the offences. Accordingly, accused stands convicted
for offences punishable under Section 279 IPC & 146/196 M. V. Act.
ORDER ON SENTENCE
Ld. APP for the State submits that convict be sentenced as per law.
On the other hand, convict prays for a lenient view stating that he is a poor
person and is a sole bread earner of his family.
I have heard both sides on point of sentence.
..................Contd/
: 2 :
In the totality of circumstances, convict person is hereby admonished for the
offences punishable under Section 279 IPC & 146/196 M. V. Act.
Bail bonds are cancelled and surety is discharged. Superdarinama, if any also
stands cancelled. Vehicles, if any be also released to its rightful owner(s) against
acknowledgment as per rules. Original documents of complainant/injured, convict and his
surety, if any be released to them after cancellation of endorsement, if any against
acknowledgment as per rules. A copy of order on sentence be supplied to the convict and
complainant/injured free of costs.
File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
Announced in the open Courton March 16, 2016.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
FIR No.26/2010
PS – Vasant Vihar
16.03.2016
Present : Ld. APP for the State.
Sh. D. D. Tripathi, Ld. Counsel alongwith accused.
Final arguments from both sides heard.
Put up the matter for clarifications, if any/final orders on 17.03.2016 at 04:00
pm.
(HARVINDER SINGH) M.M.06/PHC (NDD),
New Delhi/16.03.2016
FIR No. 1366/2014PS Vasant Vihar.
This is an application for seeking direction be given to IO concerned to file status report on behalf of applicant Vijay Kumar Shukla who is brother of deceased Ajay Shukla.
Present: Ld. APP for the State.
Counsel for applicant.
Status report not filed.
Let fresh notice to IO to remained present with case diary, for
consideration on 29.03.2016.
(Harvinder Singh) MM06/PHC/ND/16.03.2016
CC No. 515/1/14
File taken up today on an application for recalling proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C issued against applicant/accused namely Vineet Kumar.
Present: None for complainant.
Applicant/accused with counsel.
Sh. Deepak, Ahlmad of this court, submits that notice called be
not issued to the complainant due to shortage of time.
In view of the same, let Notice be issued to the complainant of
application of accused for date fixed.
In the meantime orders qua arrest of accused Vineet Kumar are
hereby stayed.
Put up on date already fixed .i.e 22.03.2016.
Copy of order be given dasti.
(Harvinder Singh) MM06/PHC/ND/16.03.2016
CC No. 257/1/13
Present: Complainant with counsel Sh. Anwar Ali Khan.
Accused no. 1 & 2 are already discharged.
Accused no. 3 and 4 are present with counsel Sh. S.P Singh.
Today matter is fixed for Pre Charge Evidence. However, no time
left as it is already 01.25 pm. Therefore matter in adjourned.
Put up for PreCharge Evidence for 01.07.2016.
(Harvinder Singh) MM06/PHC/ND/16.03.2016
FIR No. 203/10PS Parliament Street
Present: Ld. APP for the State.
Complainant Naveen Mishra present as summoned witness.
Accused in person.
Both the sides submits that they compromised the matter
between themselves.
A copy of Mutual Settlement Deed filed on record.
Both the sides seeks time to file the quashing petition before the
Hon'ble High Court and seek an adjournment. Allowed.
Put up for further proceedings on 05.09.2016.
(Harvinder Singh) MM06/PHC/ND/16.03.2016
FIR No. 110/12PS South Campus
Present: Ld. APP for the State.
Accused Vijay Dixit produced from JC.
Sh. Rakesh Kumar, Ld. Counsel for accused is present.
Accused Kalpana Dixit is absent.
Ld. Counsel for accused moved an application for grant of bail of
the present accused in this matter.
It is also submitted by the Ld. Counsel for accused that they have
made major part of the payment of the settled amount to the complainant.
Let notice be issued to complainant for NDOH.
Put up for consideration on the said application/further
proceedings on 11.04.2016. Rehnumai on 30.03.2016.
(Harvinder Singh) MM06/PHC/ND/16.03.2016
FIR No. 103/10PS South Campus
Present: Ld. APP for the State.
Accused Vijay Dixit produced from JC(on bail) with counsel.
Accused Suman Malhotra is already declared PO.
Put up with connected matter on 11.04.2016.
(Harvinder Singh) MM06/PHC/ND/16.03.2016
FIR No. 291/15PS Vasant Vihar
Present: Ld. APP for the State.
Accused Lokesh Kumar produced from JC.
Sh. Banarsi Lal, Ld. Counsel for accused.
PW2 ASI Dindayal is present. He is examined, crossexamined
and discharged.
PE stands closed.
Put up for recording statement of accused on 30.03.2016.
(Harvinder Singh) MM06/PHC/ND/16.03.2016
CC No. 971/01/15
Present: Sh. Pradeep Singh, Ld. Consel for complainant.
AR of complainant is absent.
Accused produced from JC.
Sh. Anindiya Malhotra, Ld. Counsel for accused is present.
On oral prayer, AR of complainant is exempted from personal
appearance from today only.
Today matter is fixed for consideration on notice.
It is submitted by the Ld. Counsel for accused that though the
accused was supplied copies of complaint , but since accused was in JC,
therefore, he was not able to discuss the matter with accused and the defence
which they would like to submit in the notice. He further request for short
adjournment in the matter.
On the other hand, request is strongly opposed by the Ld.
Counsel for complainant, submitting that Ld. Counsel had ample opportunity
to visit the jail and to make preparation for defence to be submitted. Therefore,
request be disallowed.
Submission of both sides considered.
In the interest of justice one short adjournment is granted.
Put up for consideration on notice on 30.03.2016.
(Harvinder Singh) MM06/PHC/ND/16.03.2016
FIR No.694/15PS South Campus
Present: Ld. APP for the State.
Accused Amit produced from JC.
Sh. Rakesh Kumar Gupta, Ld. LAC for accusaed.
Sh. Rohit Aggarwal is present on behalf of complainant Sanjay
Mehra.
It is submitted by Sh. Rohit Aggarwal, that Sanjay Mehra is ill
today and he could not appear in this matter today. An application for the
same is filed by him.
In view of the same, Sh. Sanjay Mehra is exempted from
personal appearance for today only. He is directed through Rohit Aggarwal to
appear on NDOH for evidence.
At this stage an application U/s. 437 Cr.P.C has been moved on
behalf of accused Amit filed by LAC.
In view of the fact that accused is in JC since long. He is
admitted to bail subject on furnishing PB/SB for sum of Rs. 20,000/. PB/SB
shall be accepted after verification.
PB/SB not furnished. Accused is send to JC till NDOH.
Put up for 12.04.2016. Rehnumai on 30.03.2016.
(Harvinder Singh) MM06/PHC/ND/16.03.2016
FIR No. 1578/15PS Vasnat Vihar
Present: Ld. APP for the State.
Accused Chandan Kumar Singh produced from JC.
LAC for accused.
Copies of challan/echallan be supplied to accused.
Put up for supplying of deficient copies/committal, if any, for
22.03.2016.
(Harvinder Singh) MM06/PHC/ND/16.03.2016
CC No. 619/01/15
Present: Sh. Rajesh Saxena, Ld. Counsel for complainant.
Complainant is absent.
An application for exemption from personal appearance on behalf
complainant filed by his counsel. Heard. Allowed for today only.
Put up for appearance of complainant/PSE on 03.08.2016.
(Harvinder Singh) MM06/PHC/ND/16.03.2016
FIR No. 81/11PS Vasant Vihar
Present: Ld. APP for the State.
Complainant in person with counsel.
Accused Pradeep Kumar Prasar is absent.
NBW issued against accused Pradeep Kumar Prasar received
back unexecuted.
A report of the IO/Inspector Ram Sahay received, wherein, it has
been submitted that FSL report is still not ready in this matter.
It appears that accused is deliberately avoiding execution of
warrants.
In these circumstances, issue process U/s. 82 Cr.P.C against
accused Pradeep Kumar Prasar returnable on NDOH.
Notice to surety be also issued for 24.06.2016.
(Harvinder Singh) MM06/PHC/ND/16.03.2016
CC No. 154/1/16
Present: Complainant with counsel Sh. Avinash Sharma.
ATR on behalf of IO/SI Sachin Kumar received, wherein he
sought some more time to file the inquiry report in this matter.
Let fresh notice to IO/SI Sachin Kumar to file the ATR for NDOH.
At request of Ld. Counsel for complainant, put up on 04.07.2016.
(Harvinder Singh) MM06/PHC/ND/16.03.2016
FIR No. 60/14PS Parliament Street
Present: Ld. APP for the State.
Accused Kamal Kumar is absent.
Summons send to accused received back with the report that his
house was found locked.
Issue BW for sum of Rs. 5000/ against accused with one surety
of like amount for 14.07.2016.
(Harvinder Singh) MM06/PHC/ND/16.03.2016
FIR No.109/14PS South Campus
Present: Ld. APP for the State.
Accused Pradeep Kumar in person(on police bail).
Counsel for accused.
Fresh Vakaltnama on behalf of accused filed. Be taken on record.
Since offence is bailable in nature, therefore, accused Pradeep
Kumar is admitted to bail subject on furnishing PB/SB for sum of Rs. 10,000/
each.
At request, police bail is extended till NDOH.
Copy of challan supplied to the accused.
Put up for furnishing PB/SB/supplying of deficient copies of
challan, if any, /consideration on notice/charge on 20.05.2016.
(Harvinder Singh) MM06/PHC/ND/16.03.2016
Recommended