SHIV KUMAR GOEL Vs. STATE
LAWS(DLH)-2012-2-522
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Decided on February 02,2012

SHIV KUMAR GOEL Appellant
VERSUS
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that initially respondent No. 2 filed the complaint before the Court of Learned CMM; Delhi wherein learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Central District, Delhi passed the order dated 25.11.2010 as under:- "4. Written arguments were filed on behalf of the complainant. From the above facts and circumstances and evidence, it appears that the complainant had entrusted the money to the accused No. 7 & 8 which they have misappropriated by not transferring the same to the d-mat account of the complainant as per his instructions. Therefore, both the accused i.e. accused No. 7 and 8 are summoned u/s 406 IPC. 5. The allegation of threatening the complainant is not substantiated as no evidence has produced on record for the same. Therefore, complaint is dismissed with regard to the allegation of threat of life. From the facts and evidence on record, no offence against any of other accused is made out." Vide the aforesaid order dated 25.11.2010, learned Metropolitan Magistrate summoned accused Nos. 7 & 8 under Section 406 Indian Penal Code, 1860. Further observed that allegation of threatening the complainant is not substantiated as the complainant has not produced any evidence on record for the same. Thus, the complaint was dismissed with regards to the allegation of threat of life, as no offence against any other alleged accused was made out.
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that complainant in the aforesaid complaint case, challenged the aforementioned order dated 25.11.2011 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Central District, Delhi by way of filing Criminal Revision No. 70/2010 before the Sessions Court and same is pending for disposal.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn the attention of this Court that the respondent No. 2 filed the aforesaid complaint dated 07.08.2008 mentioning the jurisdiction of police station Darya Ganj. Thereafter, respondent No. 2 after the gap of about 12 days filed another complaint case bearing C.C. No. 2046/1/2008 before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate exercising jurisdiction over Police Station Kamla Market.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.