Full Text
Translation output
CRL.M.C. 795/2019
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Order: February 13, 2019
HIGH COURT OF 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
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
Through: Mr. M.S.Oberoi, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State with SI Rajeshwar
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR O R D E R (ORAL)
Quashing of FIR No.261/2017, under Sections 279/338 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
279/338 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.
2019:DHC:969
Quashing of FIR No.261/2017, under Sections 279/338 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
279/338 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.
2019:DHC:969
CRL.M.C. 795/2019
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
FEBRUARY 13, 2019 v 2019:DHC:969
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
FEBRUARY 13, 2019 v 2019:DHC:969
JUDGMENT