Aditya Mittal vs.state & Anr. - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1221374
CourtDelhi High Court
Decided OnFeb-13-2019
AppellantAditya Mittal
RespondentState & Anr.
Excerpt:
* in the high court of delhi at new delhi date of order: february 13, 2019 + crl.m.c. 795/2019 & crl.m.as. 3227-28/2019 aditya mittal .....petitioner through: mr. shekhar prit jha, mr. anurag bansal and ms. susmita mahala, advocates versus state & anr. .....respondents through: mr. m.s.oberoi, additional public prosecutor for respondent-state with si rajeshwar coram: hon'ble mr. justice sunil gaur order (oral) quashing of fir no.261/2017, under sectionsof ipc, registered at police station dwarka sector-23, delhi is sought on merits. learned counsel for petitioner submits that charge-sheet in this case has been filed and vide impugned order of 29th november, 2018 charge has been framed against petitioner for the offence under sectionof ipc. learned counsel for petitioner submits that there is no application of mind in filing of the charge-sheet and framing of the charge as the complainant/first informant of this fir has not stated anything against petitioner and first informant has rather given a clean chit to petitioner. crl.m.c. 795/2019 page 1 of 2 upon hearing and perusal of the fir, charge-sheet and the impugned order of 29th november, 2018, i find that complainant/first informant of this fir has categorically stated as under:-"“one wagon-r car no.hr-26-cd-4110 driven by hem raj, s/o banwari lal, r/o h.no.211, ravi nagar, while driving negligently hit him even if he tried to save himself. after another car while trying to applying the break, the car slams the wagon-r, however by that time victim got injured and there is no fault of second car.” in view of afore-noted narration, it becomes crystal clear that prima facie case is not made out against petitioner and so, filing of charge-sheet and framing of charge against petitioner cannot be sustained. accordingly, the fir of this case and charge-sheet filed in the impugned order are hereby quashed. this petition and the applications are accordingly disposed of. (sunil gaur) judge february13 2019 v crl.m.c. 795/2019 page 2 of 2
Judgment:

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: February 13, 2019 + CRL.M.C. 795/2019 & CRL.M.As. 3227-28/2019 ADITYA MITTAL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Shekhar Prit Jha, Mr. Anurag Bansal and Ms. Susmita Mahala, Advocates versus STATE & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. M.S.Oberoi, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State with SI Rajeshwar CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER

(ORAL) Quashing of FIR No.261/2017, under Sections
of IPC, registered at police station Dwarka Sector-23, Delhi is sought on merits. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that charge-sheet in this case has been filed and vide impugned order of 29th November, 2018 charge has been framed against petitioner for the offence under Section
of IPC. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that there is no application of mind in filing of the charge-sheet and framing of the charge as the complainant/first informant of this FIR has not stated anything against petitioner and first informant has rather given a clean chit to petitioner. CRL.M.C. 795/2019 Page 1 of 2 Upon hearing and perusal of the FIR, charge-sheet and the impugned order of 29th November, 2018, I find that complainant/first informant of this FIR has categorically stated as under:-

"“One Wagon-R car No.HR-26-CD-4110 driven by Hem Raj, s/o Banwari Lal, R/o H.No.211, Ravi Nagar, while driving negligently hit him even if he tried to save himself. After another car while trying to applying the break, the car slams the wagon-R, however by that time victim got injured and there is no fault of second car.” In view of afore-noted narration, it becomes crystal clear that prima facie case is not made out against petitioner and so, filing of charge-sheet and framing of charge against petitioner cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the FIR of this case and charge-sheet filed in the impugned order are hereby quashed. This petition and the applications are accordingly disposed of. (SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE FEBRUARY13 2019 v CRL.M.C. 795/2019 Page 2 of 2