Allowed

Brajesh Kumar v. Delhi Police & Ors.

Delhi HC6 Mar 2018W.P.(CRL)/687/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Delhi High Court allowed a PIL seeking orders for investigation into alleged embezzlement of CCCRT scholarship funds. Directing the Police investigation of FIR No. 36/2018 to be escalated to the Crime Branch under DCP supervision. No other major directions allowed.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 36/2018 investigation to be escalated to Crime Branch under DCP supervision within 48 hours.

Brajesh Kumar Vs Delhi Police & Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 5

¶3

W.P.(CRL) 687/2018

¶4

BRAJESH KUMAR ..... Petitioner Through: Mr Abhas Kumar, Advocate along with Petitioner in person

¶5

versus

¶6

DELHI POLICE & ORS. ..... Respondents Through:Mr Anil Soni, CGSC with Mr Nivesh Sharma for R-2,3,4 and 5 Mr Piyush Gaur, Advocate for UOI Mr Rahul Mehra, Standing Counsel (Crl.) with Mr Chaitanya Gosain, Advocates with Inspector Aditi Lily and SI Virender Singh PS Dwarka South Mr Ripu Daman Bhardwaj, SPP for R-8/CBI

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA

¶9

O R D E R % 06.03.2018

¶10

Crl. MA 4120/2018 (exemption)

¶11

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶12

W.P.(CRL) 687/2018

¶13

Mr. Brajesh Kumar has approached this Court by way of present petition as a Public Interest Litigation („PIL‟) seeking, inter alia , a direction from the Court to monitor the investigation into the alleged embezzlement and misappropriation of scholarship fund provided to children by the Centre for Cultural Resources and Training („CCRT‟), an autonomous body working

¶14

W.P.(CRL) 687/2018 Page 1 of 4

¶15

under the Ministry of Culture, Government of India “by constituting a multidisciplinary Special Investigation Team (SIT) consisting of Delhi Police, Economic Offence Wing (EOW) headed by CBI”. An alternative prayer is for the Court to direct a time-bound CBI investigation.

¶16

On receipt of the advance copy of the petition, Inspector Mukesh Kumar, the Station House Officer („SHO‟) of PS Dwarka South has filed a status report dated 6^th March, 2018 in which he states that at the said PS he had received a complaint from Mr C.G. Joshi, Director of the CCRT stating that the CCRT provides scholarships to young children in the age group of 10 years to 14 years in various artistic fields at the national level. It was stated that the CCRT had received many complaints from the children and their parents regarding non-receipt of scholarship amounts. In the complaint it was stated that as a result of some preliminary enquiry it was believed that an ex-employee of the CCRT was involved in replacing/altering the names of actual scholarship holders in the soft copy of their details which were provided by the Scholarship section of CCRT. The funds were then diverted by replacing the details and inserting those of himself, his wife, mother and other persons known to him while forwarding the release payment. The fraud spoken of in the complaint was to the tune of Rs.37.25 lacs over a period of three years. A list of 16 individuals who had received the fraudulent payment was also set out in the complaint.

¶17

It is stated in the status report that on the above complaint, FIR No.36/2018 was registered on 7^th February, 2018 at PS Dwarka South under Section 420 Indian Penal Code („IPC‟). The statement of the Director has

¶18

W.P.(CRL) 687/2018 Page 2 of 4

¶19

been recorded and several documents collected. Investigations are underway.

¶20

Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the Petitioner does not have any additional material to offer to the police for the purposes of the investigation. He points out that despite the complaint having been received by the police sometime in September, 2017, it is only on 7^th February, 2018 that an FIR was registered. According to him, the Director, CCRT himself is perhaps one of the persons involved and, therefore, he does not expect the investigation on a complaint made by such a person to be conducted in a free and fair manner and taken to its logical conclusion.

¶21

Mr Rahul Mehra, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State has drawn the attention of the Court to the extracts from the Special Audit Report concerning the CCRT, which has been enclosed with the petition. The said Report inter alia recommended that the approvals given by the Director, CCRT since 2012 should be declared as null and void and that action should be taken against him under CCS (Conduct) Rules. Mr. Mehra states that in view of the observations made against the complainant himself in the Special Audit Report, it might become necessary for the investigation of the FIR in question to be escalated to the Crime Branch.

¶22

The Court takes the above submission on record and directs that the investigation of FIR No. 36/2018 registered at PS Dwarka South be escalated to the Crime Branch of the Delhi Police under the Supervision of the concerned Deputy Commissioner of Police („DCP‟), forthwith and in any event not later than 48 hours from now.

¶23

W.P.(CRL) 687/2018 Page 3 of 4

¶24

The Court would like to reiterate that if the Petitioner has any substantial material which he thinks should be investigated, he can provide it to the Crime Branch of the Delhi Police who will then examine it with the seriousness that it deserves.

¶25

With the FIR having been registered on 6^th February, 2018 i.e. just a month ago, it is not possible for the Court at this stage to conclude that the investigation will not take place in accordance with law. If the Petitioner finds that even after a lapse of time there is no substantial progress in the investigations, he may seek such remedies as are available to him in accordance with law.

¶26

No further directions are called for at this stage. The petition is disposed of.

¶27

Dasti to the parties under signature of the Court Master.

¶28

S. MURALIDHAR, J.

¶29

I.S. MEHTA, J.

¶30

MARCH 06, 2018 rd

¶31

W.P.(CRL) 687/2018 Page 4 of 4

Brajesh Kumar v. Delhi Police & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Brajesh Kumar v. Delhi Police & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rameshwar Singh & Anr. Vs State & Anr.

Sunil Puri Vs State (Nct Delhi)& Ors.

Birju Rajak & Ors. Vs State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Sandeep Tomar & Ors. Vs State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Video Prasad Yadav Vs State

Vineet Choudhary Vs State (Nct of Delhi)

Chander Shekhar Chanchal & Ors. Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Shri Ateet Gupta & Ors. Vs the State & Anr.

Baljeet Vs State NCT of Delhi

Vikas Verma Vs Registrar Cooperative Societies & Anr.

Saroj Sharma Vs State of NCT of Delhi

Aslam Vs State N.C.T. of Delhi

Kallu & Ors. Vs State

Rohit @ Rahul Vs State of NCT of Delhi