Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Krishan Kumar Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi and anr

Krishan Kumar vs Govt. of Nct of Delhi and anr

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Dec 20, 2010
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/907669

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

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Delhi High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Crl.M.C.No. 3850/2010
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

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

[N.K. PATIL; H.S.KEMPANNA, JJ.] This MFA is filed U/S 173(1) of MV Act against the Judgment and Award dated: 28/07/2004 passed in MVC No. 1981/2000 on the file of the Prl. Civil Judge (Sr.Dn), Addl. MACT. Udupi, partly allowing the claim petition for compensation and seeking enhancement of compensation with interest...

Key legal issue
Criminal
Acts & sections
Constitution of India - Article 227; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 482, 251

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Krishan Kumar

Advocate Mr. C.S.Ratoure; Mr. Muntazir Mehdi, Advs.

Respondent

Govt. of Nct of Delhi and anr

Advocate Mr. Sunil Sharma; Mr. Sunil Fernandes; Mr. Deepak Pathak, Advs.

Legal References

Acts
Constitution of India - Article 227; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 482, 251

Excerpt

[n.k. patil; h.s.kempanna, jj.] this mfa is filed u/s 173(1) of mv act against the judgment and award dated: 28/07/2004 passed in mvc no. 1981/2000 on the file of the prl. civil judge (sr.dn), addl. mact. udupi, partly allowing the claim petition for compensation and seeking enhancement of compensation with interest at 18% p.a.this petition has been filed by the petitioner under article 227 of the constitution of india read with section 482 cr.p.c. for quashing/setting aside the summoning order dated 6th september, 2010 passed by the learned special judge on a complaint of the respondent about theft of electricity. the petitioner has sought quashing of complaint and the summoning order on the ground that the petitioner was falsely involved by the respondent in a case of theft of electricity. the inspection report of the respondent and the consequential allegations that theft was committed by the petitioner have also been assailed on the ground that the inspection report was false and it was not in respect of the premises of the petitioner. the petitioner has relied upon certain photographs filed with the complaint showing that the alleged cable through which electricity was considered stolen was not coming into his house.it is obvious that the petitioner has raised disputed questions of facts in this petition. this court cannot adjudicate questions of facts in a petition under section 482 cr.p.c. the petitioner has to approach the trial court and at the time of taking notice under section 251 cr.p.c., the petitioner has to disclose his defence and prove the defence during trial. i find no force in this petition. the petition is hereby dismissed.

Full Judgment

This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing/setting aside the summoning order dated 6th September, 2010 passed by the learned Special Judge on a complaint of the respondent about theft of electricity. The petitioner has sought quashing of complaint and the summoning order on the ground that the petitioner was falsely involved by the respondent in a case of theft of electricity. The inspection report of the respondent and the consequential allegations that theft was committed by the petitioner have also been assailed on the ground that the inspection report was false and it was not in respect of the premises of the petitioner. The petitioner has relied upon certain photographs filed with the complaint showing that the alleged cable through which electricity was considered stolen was not coming into his house.

It is obvious that the petitioner has raised disputed questions of facts in this petition. This Court cannot adjudicate questions of facts in a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The petitioner has to approach the trial Court and at the time of taking notice under Section 251 Cr.P.C., the petitioner has to disclose his defence and prove the defence during trial. I find no force in this petition. The petition is hereby dismissed.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial