Ashish Madaan vs.state & Ors

Ashish Madaan vs State & Ors

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Mar 12, 2019

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1221968

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1221968
Court: Delhi High Court
Decided On: Mar 12, 2019
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Ashish Madaan

Respondent

State & Ors

Excerpt

.....observed that when no offence is disclosed, taking of cognizance is not justified and complaint case was liable to be dismissed. crl.m.c. 1333/2019 page 1 of 2 learned counsel for petitioner submits that registration of fir is necessary to trace out one ali and to corroborate the cdr details to establish the offence under section 120-b of ipc. it is submitted that petitioner’s application under section 156(3) of cr.p.c. and criminal revision petition have been dismissed without putting opposite side to notice. upon hearing and on perusal of impugned order and the material on record, i find no justification to interfere with the concurrent findings returned by the courts below so far as dismissal of application under section 156 (3) of cr.p.c. is concerned. however, the revisional court was not justified in observing that no offence is made out. in the facts and circumstances of this case, impugned order of 28th january, 2019 is modified to the aforesaid extent while upholding dismissal of petitioner’s application under section 156(3) of cr.p.c. consequently, trial court shall proceed with pre-summoning evidence and proceed with petitioner’s complaint in accordance with the law. with aforesaid directions, this petition and applications are disposed of, while not commenting upon merits. march12 2019 p’ma (sunil gaur) judge crl.m.c. 1333/2019 page 2 of 2

Full Judgment

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: March 12, 2019 + CRL.M.C. 1333/2019 and CRL.M.As. 5301-5302/2019 ASHISH MADAAN ........ Petitioner

Through: Mr. Chirag Khurana and Mr. Nitin Arora, Advocates Versus STATE & ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. M.P. Singh, Additional Public Prosecutor for State CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER

(ORAL)... Petitioner

is accused in FIR case for the offences under Sections 406/498A/34 of IPC, and a complaint for the offence under Section 406 read with Section 120-B of IPC alongwith application under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. was filed by petitioner against his estranged wife, mother-in-law etc. Trial Court vide order of 3rd October, 2018 has dismissed petitioner’s application under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. and has directed petitioner/complainant to lead pre-summoning evidence. Revisional Court vide impugned order of 28th January, 2019 has upheld trial court’s order but has observed that when no offence is disclosed, taking of cognizance is not justified and complaint case was liable to be dismissed. CRL.M.C. 1333/2019 Page 1 of 2 Learned counsel for petitioner submits that registration of FIR is necessary to trace out one Ali and to corroborate the CDR details to establish the offence under Section 120-B of IPC. It is submitted that petitioner’s application under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. and Criminal Revision Petition have been dismissed without putting opposite side to notice. Upon hearing and on perusal of impugned order and the material on record, I find no justification to interfere with the concurrent findings returned by the courts below so far as dismissal of application under Section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C. is concerned. However, the Revisional Court was not justified in observing that no offence is made out. In the facts and circumstances of this case, impugned order of 28th January, 2019 is modified to the aforesaid extent while upholding dismissal of petitioner’s application under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. Consequently, trial court shall proceed with pre-summoning evidence and proceed with petitioner’s complaint in accordance with the law. With aforesaid directions, this petition and applications are disposed of, while not commenting upon merits. MARCH12 2019 p’ma (SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE CRL.M.C. 1333/2019 Page 2 of 2

Same Court & Year Delhi · 2019 Same Parties Ashish Madaan vs State & Ors Same Subject Land Acquisition