Full Judgment Text
$~9
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
DECIDED ON : JANUARY 12, 2017
+ CRL.M.C.2302/2016
SUMIT GUPTA ..... Petitioner
Through : Puneet Goel, Advocate.
VERSUS
STATE ..... Respondent
Through : Ms.Manjeet Arya, APP.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG
S.P.GARG, J. (ORAL)
1. Present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India
read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the petitioner to
challenge the legality of order dated 22.04.2016 of learned ACMM,
Karkardooma Courts, by which the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.
was dismissed.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and have
examined the file. The petitioner has filed a complaint case under Section
190 Cr.P.C. against the respondents therein for commission of offences
under Sections 384/406/420 IPC. Application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.
was filed for directions to the SHO/DCP of Police Station Preet Vihar for
registration of the FIR. The Trial Court for detailed reasons declined to
Crl.M.C.2302/2016 Page 1 of 2
issue any such direction. The case was adjourned for recording statements
of the witnesses under Section 202 Cr.P.C.
3. The Trial Court noted in the impugned order that the facts and
circumstances of the case were within the complainant’s knowledge. Identity
of the suspects is also known and no investigation by police is required at
this stage.
4. The complainant as a matter of right cannot insist for
investigation by the police under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. As per allegations
in the complaint, the complainant had entered into an agreement to install
lift at his residence. The deal was finalized and assurance was given by the
suspects to install lift of brand quality. A sum of ` 9,10,000/- was paid, as
agreed, by way of cheques. It is alleged that subsequently the suspects
demanded more money and the lift was not installed. On the face of it, the
dispute between the parties seems to be of civil nature.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I find no
merit in the present petition and it is dismissed.
(S.P.GARG)
JUDGE
JANUARY 12, 2017
s a
Crl.M.C.2302/2016 Page 2 of 2