Statement of the accused under Section 313 of Cr. P.C. r/w Section 281 of Cr. P.C Statement of accused Jasdeep Singh S/o Sh. J. S. Bhatia.

Transcription

1 Statement of the accused under Section 313 of Cr. P.C. r/w Section 281 of Cr. P.C. FIR No.31/ Statement of accused Jasdeep Singh S/o Sh. J. S. Bhatia. PS Parliament Street U/s 279/337/304A IPC State Vs. Jasdeep Singh Without Oath Q. It is alleged against you that on at about 07:20 am at crossing R. P. Road, Janpath, New Delhi, you were driving Hyundai Getz car bearing registration number HR 26Y 7022 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 DL 1RL 1993 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 , 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 HR 26Y 7022 and one bearing registration number TSR DL 1R 1993 in accidental condition. The driver of above mentioned car Jasdeep was also present at the spot and he informed them that one lady has been injured due to collusion between above mentioned 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 : 2 : of FIR, got FIR registered and after registration of FIR, came back at the spot along with 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 HR 26Y 7022 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 : 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 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.

4 Present : Ld. APP for the State. FIR No.31/2013 PS Parliament Street U/s 279/337/304A IPC State Vs. Jasdeep Singh Sh. Sanjay Bhargav, Ld. Counsel along with accused Jasdeep Singh. Sh. Mangal Singh in person as summoned witness. Today, witness Mangal Singh examined as PW2, cross examined by Ld. APP for the State, not cross examined 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 cross examination done by Ld. APP for the State. Perusal of the case file reveals that the present witness/pw2 is the only eye witness to the incident. In view of the above judgment, above said facts and circumstances and further since only eye witness 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/

5 : 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

6 CHARGE FIR No.388/2014 PS Vasant Vihar U/s 411 IPC State Vs. Gurpreet Singh 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 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 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 above said offence. New Delhi/ Certified 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 New Delhi/

7 FIR No.388/2014 PS Vasant Vihar U/s 411 IPC State Vs. Gurpreet Singh 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 prima facie 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) along with case property be summoned for evidence on NDOH. Put up the matter for PE on

8 Babli Kumari Vs. Rajan Kumar Jha C.C.No.191/01/14 PS Vasant Vihar 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 nonprosecution and for non appearance of the complainant. File be consigned to Record Room after due compliance.

9 Ashim Kumar Sen Gupta Vs. Siddharta Sen Gupta etc. C.C.No.284/01/16 PS South Campus 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

10 Maheshwari Vs. Kuldeep C.C.No.1030/ 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

11 Rakesh Aggarwal Vs. Gaurav Tandon C.C.No.1182/01/15 PS Great Kailash 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

12 Present : Complainant Rakesh Aggarwal in person. Rakesh Aggarwal Vs. Gaurav Tandon Sh. Amit Anand, Ld. Counsel along with accused Gaurav Tandon. C.C.No.1182/01/15 PS Great Kailash 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 Court on March 16, 2016.

13 Present : Nilendra Pratap Singh Vs. Mani Shankar Aiyar etc. C.C.No.1098/01/15 PS Parliament Street Sh. Shalender Pratap Singh, Ld. Counsel along with complainant. At request, put up the matter for consideration on

14 Rational Business Corporation Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Anand Rai C.C.No.580/01/ Present : Sh. Rajiv Ranjan Kumar, Ld. Counsel for the complainant. Complainant is absent. Sh. Sudhir Kumar, Proxy counsel along with 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

15 Savitri Devi Vs. Y. Khan etc. C.C.No.933/01/ 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

16 FIR No.1395/2015 PS Vasant Vihar U/s 354D/376/313/341/342/506/509 IPC State Vs. Vijesh Kumar Sangwan Present : Ld. APP for the State. Sh. Arun, Ld. Counsel along with accused Vijesh Kumar Sangwan. The accused person submits that he has received complete and legible set of documents along with e challan. 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 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 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.

17 Religare Securities Ltd. Vs. C.C.No. PS K. G. Marg 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

18 Present : Ld. APP for the State. Sh. Ramesh Kumar, Ld. Counsel along with accused. FIR No.61/2012 PS South Campus 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

19 FIR No.162/2012 PS Vasant Vihar 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 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.

20 Chander Pal Gautam Vs. A. S. Bedi etc. C.C.No.618/01/15 PS Vasant Vihar Present : Sh. C. S. Gautam, Ld. Counsel along with 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 above said aspects on NDOH. Put up the matter for consideration on

21 FIR No.11/2015 PS North Avenue U/s 279/337 IPC & 146/196 M. V. Act State Vs. Lalit Singh 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 above said 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.

22 Ahmer Khan Vs. Smriti Z. Irani C.C.No.343/01/15 PS Parliament Street Present : Sh. K. K. Manon, Ld. Sr. Counsel along with Sh. Rajesh Inamdar and Ms. Anjali Rajput, Ld. Counsels along with 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 , one certified copy of result of B. Com (Honors I) pertaining to year and one certified copy of enrollment/admission form for academic session 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 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.

23 FIR No.789/2015 PS Vasant Vihar U/s 279 IPC & 185 M. V. Act State Vs. Devender Rathore 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 FIR No.1306/2015 PS Vasant Vihar U/s 188 IPC State Vs. Dinesh Dass 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 above said 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 IO is directed to remain present in person along with previous conviction record of the accused in same offence, if any before the National Lok Adalat to be held on

25 FIR No.685/2015 PS Vasant Vihar U/s 363 IPC State Vs. Cancellation Report 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

26 along with bag. Present : FIR No.137/2016 PS South Campus This is an application for releasing of articles as mentioned in the application 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 T point 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 Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in above said 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 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 along with 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/

27 : 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 along with 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 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 passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. Dasti copy of order be given as prayed for.

28 Statement of accused Sansar S/o Sh. Ram Singh Yadav. FIR No.790/2015 PS Vasant Vihar 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

29 Present : FIR No.790/2015 PS - Vasant Vihar U/s IPC State Vs. Sansar Fresh challan under Section 279 IPC filed by IO. It be checked and registered. 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....contd/-

30 : 2 : Present : At 04:00 pm. 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 Court on March 16, 2016.

31 M/s Ish Travel & Tours Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/s My Agent Travel & Tourism C.C.No.572/01/ Statement of Sh. Raman Jain, AR of the complainant. On SA I tender into evidence my affidavit Ex.CW1/A as my pre summoning evidence which bears my signatures at point 'A' and 'B'. I rely on documents Ex.CW1/1 to Ex.CW1/8 in pre summoning evidence. We do not press our complaint against accused no.01. I hereby close my pre summoning evidence. RO&AC

32 Present : Raman Jain. M/s Ish Travel & Tours Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/s My Agent Travel & Tourism C.C.No.572/01/16 Fresh case received by way of assignment. It be checked and registered. Sh. Sushil Kumar Sharma, Ld. Counsel along with AR of the complainant Sh. 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 presummoning evidence along with documents and has deposed that they do not press their complaint against accused no.01. He has closed his pre summoning 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, Hence, issue summons against the accused no.02 on P.F./R.C. for The complainant can provide 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. 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. An

33 M/s Akzo Nobel India Limited Vs. M/s Alam Trading Company etc. C.C.No.571/01/ Statement of Sh. Bharat Lal Juyal, AR of the complainant. On SA I tender into evidence my affidavit Ex.CW1/A as my pre summoning evidence which bears my signatures at point 'A' and 'B'. I rely on documents Ex.CW1/1 to Ex.CW1/9 in pre summoning evidence. We do not press our complaint against accused no.01. I hereby close my pre summoning evidence. RO&AC

34 Present : M/s Akzo Nobel India Limited Vs. M/s Alam Trading Company etc. C.C.No.571/01/16 Fresh case received by way of assignment. It be checked and registered. Sh. Nitesh, Ld. Counsel along with 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 presummoning evidence along with documents and has deposed that they do not press their complaint against accused no.01. He has closed his pre summoning 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, Hence, issue summons against the accused no.02 on P.F./R.C. for The complainant can provide 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. 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. An

35 M/s Akzo Nobel India Limited Vs. C.C.No. (02) Statement of Sh. Bharat Lal Juyal, AR of the complainant. On SA I tender into evidence my affidavit Ex.CW1/1 as my pre summoning evidence which bears my signatures at point 'A' and 'B'. I rely on documents Ex.CW1/A to Ex.CW1/G in pre summoning evidence. I hereby close my pre summoning evidence. RO&AC

36 M/s Akzo Nobel India Limited Vs. C.C.No. (02) Fresh case received by way of assignment. It be checked and registered. Present : Sh. Santosh Manglam, Ld. Counsel along with 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 pre summoning evidence along with documents. He has closed his pre summoning 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 The complainant can provide 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.

37 Statement of Sh. Vishal Singh, Ld. Counsel for the applicant. At Bar FIR No.307/2016 PS Vasant Vihar I hereby voluntarily withdraw the present application. I may be allowed for the same. I shall be bound by my statement. RO&AC

38 M/s Salora International Ltd. Vs. C.C.No 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

39 FIR No.307/2016 PS Vasant Vihar 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.

40 M/s Intec Capital Vs. C.C.No 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

41 FIR No.67/2016 PS - South Campus 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.

42 FIR No.42/2016 PS - South Campus Present : Ld. APP for the State. Sh. T. A. Siddiqui, Ld. Counsel for the accused/applicant Vikas. This is 2 nd 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.

43 FIR No.347/2016 PS Vasant Vihar 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 Copy of fresh address submitted today be sent to IO for verification.

44 FIR No.305/2006 PS Sarita Vihar 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

45 M/s Gulati Paints and Hardware Vs. Yogesh Sharma C.C.No.403/01/ Fresh case received by way of transfer. It be checked and registered. Present : Sh. Sanjay Diwan, Ld. Counsel along with 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 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.

46 Present : Ashutosh Bansal Vs. All India Council of Technical Education C.C.No.568/01/16 PS Parliament Street Fresh application received by way of assignment. It be checked and registered. Complainant Ashutosh Bansal in person. At request, put up the matter for consideration on application on

47 FIR No.245/2015 PS Tilak Marg Present : Ld. APP for the State. IO SI Kishan Lal. Sh. Arvind Khasna, Ld. Counsel along with 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 plea bargaining. In view of the same, present matter is sent back to the concerned Court through the Court of Ld. CMM (NDD), PHC for Accused person(s) is/are direct to appear before the Court of Ld. CMM (NDD), PHC on Ahlmad is directed to send the file complete in all respects to the Court of Ld. ACMM (West) well in time.

48 FIR No.548/2015 PS Vasant Vihar U/s 379/511/34 IPC State Vs. Sushil Kumar 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

49 Usha International Ltd. Vs. A. K. Aggarwal C.C.No.853/01/ 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 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

50 Statement of injured Ashif Ali S/o Late Sh. Mohd. Budha Khan. On SA FIR No.11/2015 PS North Avenue U/s 279/337 IPC & 146/196 M. V. Act State Vs. Lalit Singh 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

51 Statement of accused Lalit Singh S/o Sh. Sunder Singh. Without Oath FIR No.11/2015 PS North Avenue U/s 279/337 IPC & 146/196 M. V. Act State Vs. Lalit Singh 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

52 FIR No.11/2015 PS North Avenue U/s 279/337 IPC & 146/196 M. V. Act State Vs. Lalit Singh 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/

53 : 2 : In the totality of circumstances, convict person is hereby admonished for the offences punishable under Section 279 IPC & 146/196 M. V. Act. stands cancelled. Bail bonds are cancelled and surety is discharged. Superdarinama, if any also 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 Court on March 16, 2016.

54 Present : pm. FIR No.26/2010 PS Vasant Vihar Ld. APP for the State. Sh. D. D. Tripathi, Ld. Counsel along with accused. Final arguments from both sides heard. Put up the matter for clarifications, if any/final orders on at 04:00

55 FIR No. 1366/2014 PS 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 (Harvinder Singh) MM 06/PHC/ND/

56 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. hereby stayed. In the meantime orders qua arrest of accused Vineet Kumar are Put up on date already fixed.i.e Copy of order be given dasti. (Harvinder Singh) MM 06/PHC/ND/

57 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 pm. Therefore matter in adjourned. Put up for Pre Charge Evidence for (Harvinder Singh) MM 06/PHC/ND/

58 FIR No. 203/10 PS Parliament Street Present: between themselves. Ld. APP for the State. Complainant Naveen Mishra present as summoned witness. Accused in person. Both the sides submits that they compromised the matter 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 (Harvinder Singh) MM 06/PHC/ND/

59 FIR No. 110/12 PS 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 Rehnumai on (Harvinder Singh) MM 06/PHC/ND/

60 FIR No. 103/10 PS 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 (Harvinder Singh) MM 06/PHC/ND/

61 FIR No. 291/15 PS Vasant Vihar Present: and discharged. Ld. APP for the State. Accused Lokesh Kumar produced from JC. Sh. Banarsi Lal, Ld. Counsel for accused. PW 2 ASI Dindayal is present. He is examined, cross examined PE stands closed. Put up for recording statement of accused on (Harvinder Singh) MM 06/PHC/ND/

62 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 (Harvinder Singh) MM 06/PHC/ND/

63 FIR No.694/15 PS South Campus Present: Mehra. 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 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 Rehnumai on (Harvinder Singh) MM 06/PHC/ND/