Vikram Prakash v. State

1. Vikram Prakash claims to be a young, educated and respectable person with clean antecedents.

2. The State laughs it off by informing this Court that various FIRs, being 10 in number, have been registered at instance of various persons in which he is an accused and lest he argues that all of them have been registered at Delhi, the State highlights that FIR No.128/2010 for offences punishable Cri.M.C. Nos.l785/08 & 1788/08 2011:DHC:12081 under Section 307/1208 IPC has been registered against him at PS Civil Lines, Meerut, U.P.

3. Vikram Prakash states that he had the misfortune to incur the wrath of his neighbour, Amresh Kumar Singh, who is an outlaw and that on 5.8.2005 said Amresh Kumar Singh launched a murderous assault on his i.e. Vikram Prakash's wife Ritu; for which FIR No.670/05 dated 5.8.2005 for an offence punishable under Section 326 IPC has been registered.

4. Vikram Prakash alleges that thereafter 2 FIRs No.252 dated 5.4.2006 for offences punishable under Section 341/506/34 IPC as also another FIR No.253 dated 5.4.2006 for offences punishable under· Section 186/353/34 IPC were registered at PS Prashant Vihar and he alleges that this is at the behest of Amresh Kumar Singh.

5. Petitioner states that the 2 FIRs are in retaliation by Amresh Kumar Singh and that the police is hand in glove with Amresh Kumar Singh.

6. Indeed, we find that the complainant in FIR No.252/06 is Amresh Kumar Singh and as per the complaint he states that to purchase ice cream as his wife, children and he went outside the society complex where they reside i.e. Savera Apartments, Vikram Prakash threatened to kidnap and kill his children. He used filthy language and threatened Amresh Kumar Singh to sell his flat.

7. It be noted that Amresh Kumar Singh resides in Flat No.307 Savera Apartments and Vikram Prakash resides in Flat No.192. Cri.M.C. Nos.1785/08 & 1788/08 Page 2 of[3]

8. When the FIR afore-noted was registered, 51 Praveen Kumar went to investigate and he is the complainant of the FIR No.253/06 in which he has disclosed that as he went to investigate, Vikram Prakash, his.wife Ritu and her father started abusing him and Ct.Dinesh. They assaulted him and tore his shirt. They prevented him from discharging his duties.

9. It is quite apparent that Vikram Prakash is also a person of either hot temper or thinks that he could take shelter in the fact that his wife was assaulted by Amresh Kumar Singh and thus he could do whatever he wants.

10. The 2 neighbours seem to be in a running feud and thus it cannot be said that FIR No.253/2006 is motivated.

11. Case property, learned counsel for the State submits, is the torn shirt of the inspector who was assaulted i.e. 51 Praveen Kumar and this is prima-facie proof of the correctness of the FIR.

12. There is no question of quashing FIR No.253/2006.

13. As regards the other FIR, the incident is trivial and would hardly send an alarm and thus I quash FIR No.252/2006 PS Prashant Vihar.

14. The 2 petitions stand disposed of quashing FIR No.252/2006 PS Prashant Vihar for offences under Section 341/506/34 IPC. FIR No.253/2006 is not quashed.

15. No costs.