Petitioner sought enforcement of a Lokpal direction to the CVC to investigate his complaint against MCD and Delhi Police officials, and disposal of complaints under Section 340 CrPC. The court held the CVC had duly reported, allegations were unsubstantiated, and Section 340 applies only to courts. Petition dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~9
ANIL DUTT SHARMA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Manoj Kumar Dwivedi and Mr. Abhishek Gaur, Advocates.
versus
LOKPAL OF INDIA AND ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Apoorv Kurup and Mr. Akhil Hasija, Advocates for R-1. Mr. Ravinder Agarwal and Mr. Lekh Raj Singh, Advocates for R-2.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
O R D E R % 22.08.2024
“To direct the respondents to conduct fair investigation in pursuance of directions issued vide order dated 20.07.2022 in case no. 3972/2022 by respondent no. 1 to respondent no. 2, considering the evidence provided by the petitioner to respondents and giving him opportunities of hearings, the speaking orders be passed as well as complaint of the petitioner pending before them under 340 Cr.P.C be dispose off”
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/08/2024 at 12:58:41
under Section 340 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.1
“ORDER
Perused the complaint.
The complainant has filed this complaint against the Additional Commissioner and three other officials of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) and also against the officials of Delhi Police. The complainant has alleged that these public servants, in connivance with Delhi Police filed false FIR against the complainant. The complainant has alleged that his industrial unit was sealed by the MCD, even though, he has a valid license. However, the complainant has also given few references of the court cases filed in this matter in the year 2014, and mentioned about many court orders in this complaint.
After careful consideration the Full Bench refer the case to the CVC for submitting a status report in this matter within the period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the order, i.e., on or before 1ª September, 2022.
Registry of the Lokpal of India is directed to take action accordingly.
List the matter on receipt of the status report.”
“ORDER
This complaint was considered by the Full Bench of Lokpal of India on 20.07.2022, wherein, the complainant has made allegations against certain police officials and also against the officials of the East Delhi Municipal
1 “CrPC”
2 “the Lokpal”
3 “CVC”
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/08/2024 at 12:58:41
Corporation (EDMC), New Delhi with the direction to CVC to submit a status report in this matter by 01.09.2022, In compliance with the order, CVC has asked for the status report from the Commissioner of Police, Delhi and also from MCD, New Delhi.
Head of the Anti-Corruption Branch (ACB), GNCTD of Delhi submitted a report to CVC on 26th August, 2022, which was forwarded by CVC on 1st September 2022. The CVC has also requested to grant one month to MCD for submitting a detailed report on the matter. Full Bench has approved an extension upto 10.10.2022 in its meeting dated 19.09.2022.
ACB of GNCTD of Delhi has given their detailed report vide letter dated 26.08.2022, which is forwarded by the CVC vide O.M.Nq.022/MCD/010-523258 dated 01.09.2022. The gist of the remarks is as under;
“The Criminal Complaint u/s 200 r/w 156(3) Cr. PC. of the complainant against Investigating Officer and Raiding Officer of Case FIR No.51/2014 P.S. Anti-Corruption Branch was dismissed by Trial Court vide detailed order dated 26.10.2020 mentioning that “the complainant gave a formal complaint about the incident to police only on 11.07.2019 that is after more than 5 years of the alleged offence. It seems to have been lodged with the sole intention to create pressure on the investigating officer, the raid officer and the complainant in the FIR i.e. the three proposed accused, which cannot be allowed to continue in the facts and circumstance of this case at present.
In view of above the allegation made by complainant are not substantiated.
Further, a case where FIR No. 51/14 P.S. ACB was registered against JE, MCD, Shahdara after he was caught red handed on the spot while demanding accepting/obtaining amount bribe Rs. 1 Lac from the complainant. Subsequently three more cases vide FIR Nos. 58/14, 59/14 & 60/14 were also registered against JB, MCD, Shahdara.
Head of the Anti-Corruption Branch (ACB), GNCTD of Delhi submitted a report to CVC on 26th August 2022, which was forwarded by CVC on 1st September 2022. The CVC has also requested to grant one month to MCD for submitting a detailed report on the matter. Full Bench has approved an extension upto 10.10.2022 in its meeting dated 19.09.2022. ACB of GNCTD of Delhi has given their detailed report vide letter dated 26.08.2022, which is forwarded by the CVC vide O.M.No.022/MCD/010- 523258 dated 01.09.2022. The gist of the remarks is as under:
“The Criminal Complaint u/s 200 r/w 156(3) Cr. PC. of the complainant against Investigating Officer and Raiding Officer of Case FIR No.51/2014 P.S. Anti-Corruption Branch was dismissed by Trial Court vide detailed order dated 26.10.2020 mentioning that "the complainant gave a formal complaint about the incident to police only on 11.07.2019 ' that is after more than 5 years of the alleged offence. It seems to have been lodged
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/08/2024 at 12:58:41
with the sole intention to create pressure on the investigating officer, the raid officer and the complainant in the FIR i.e. the three proposed accused, which cannot be allowed to continue in the facts and circumstance of this case at present.
In view of above the allegation made by complainant are not substantiated.
Further, a case where FIR No. 51/14 P.S. ACB was registered against JE, MCD, Shahdara after he was caught red handed on the spot while demanding accepting/obtaining amount bribe Rs. 1 Lac from the complainant. Subsequently three more cases vide FIR Nos. 58/14, 59/14 & 60/14 were also registered against JE, MCD, Shahdara. The complainant is making complaint against police officers/IOs to create undue pressure on the IOs.
The complaint filed by the complainant is malicious, motivated and devoid of any merit hence same is liable to be dismissed.
The CVC has also forwarded a report received from MCD vide O.M. NO.022/MCD/010-527010 dated 06.10.2022 to the Lokpal of India, as mentioned below:
“That it is further observed that as per the submissions of the complainant himself, the Writ Petitions filed by him have either been dismissed by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi or Notices have been issued. And that in one such Writ Petition, the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi while dismissing the Writ Petition has observed that the relief sought are nothing but stating the obvious and that keeping in view the vague and evasive nature of pleadings and relief sought, we rind no merit in the petition and further keeping in view of the conduct of the petitioner, as noted by this Court in the order dated 10.08.2015 in W.P (C) No. 7556/2015, we do not think it appropriate to entertain the present petition filed as a public interest litigation at the behest of the petitioner.
In another PIL/Court case titled complainant Vs Union of India & Ors. (W.P. (C) 1046/2017, also filed by the complainant with certain prayers in the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi was dismissed by the Hon’ble Chief Justice, vide his order dated 07.08.2019 with cost of Rs. 25,000 (Rupbes Twenty-Five Thousand Ohly) on the petitioner. Further, in respect of various court reference it has been noticed that complainant after his arrest by ACB and now released on bail, lodged some PILs Court cases in the Courts of Delhi”.
As per documents enclosed with the complaints, the FIR N0.II11/2014 was lodged in P.S. Bhajanpura, and another FIR No.51/2014 lodged with ACB, by the complainant. The matter is under trial and subjudice before Special Judge, (PC Act) (APB)-02, Rouse Avenue District Courts, Delhi.
As such allegations regarding filing of false FIR by the officers of MCD is connivance of Delhi Police are also not substantiated”.
It is evident that many cases registered in 2014 are still sub- judice
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/08/2024 at 12:58:41
and cases filed by the complainant in various courts are also pending for final decisions.
As the CVC has agreed with the findings of both Departments (Delhi Police and MCD). The Full Bench is inclined to close this case.
Accordingly, the complaint is disposed of.”
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/08/2024 at 12:58:41
of the CrPC specifically applies to courts, whereas the Petitioner has approached the Lokpal and the CVC – neither of which constitutes a court – under the said provision. Thus, the Court finds no merit in the case made out by the Petitioner in this regard.
SANJEEV NARULA, J
AUGUST 22, 2024 nk
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/08/2024 at 12:58:41
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the CVC complied with the Lokpal's 20.07.2022 directions to investigate and report on the petitioner's complaint.
Whether the Lokpal and CVC were obliged to dispose of the petitioner's Section 340 CrPC complaints despite not being courts.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Anil Dutt Sharma
Lokpal of India
Central Vigilance Commission
Sanjeev Narula
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
