Deepak Eapen Jacob Vs State & Anr. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Deepak Eapen Jacob Vs State & Anr. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petitions (and pending applications) disposed of; Trial Court directed to proceed with the Closure Report irrespective of the Complainant's appearance; Petitioners given liberty to seek appropriate remedy, in accordance with law, if any order is made in the Closure Report.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Order dated 21.07.2017 under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. directing registration of an FIR (Sections 418/420 r/w 120-B IPC and 34 IPC) against thirteen named persons ought to be set aside by these petitions under Sections 482/483 CrPC. +1 more

Court's answer

The 21.07.2017 Section 156(3) order was not set aside: since the FIR stands registered pursuant to it, the Closure Report has been filed, and no Protest Petition has been filed till date, the petitions are disposed of with liberty to the Petitioners to seek appropriate remedy, in accordance with law, in case there is any Order made in the Closure Report submitted in the FIR.

Ratio / Principle

The learned Trial Court is directed to proceed with the Closure Report irrespective of the appearance of the Complainant, who has notice of the same and has deliberately not been appearing before the learned Trial Court.

Key takeaways

Finding supporting the above direction: the conduct of the Complainant is intentional and is only intended to harass the Petitioners.ratio¶3

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Neena Bansal Krishna, J.; order dated 09.12.2025): Four connected CRL.M.C. petitions (Nos. 3121, 3129, 3130, 3131/2017) under Sections 482/483 CrPC sought setting aside of the CMM, Patiala House Court's order dated 21.07.2017 under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., which directed DCP, EOW to register an FIR under Sections 418/420 read with 120-B IPC and 34 IPC against thirteen persons named in Complaint Case No. 5840/2017 (dated 20.03.2017). Pursuant thereto FIR No. 128/2017 was registered; a Closure Report was filed therein in 2020 and remains pending before the Trial Court; no Protest Petition has been filed. Despite the Order dated 25.03.2025, the Complainant furnished no address and did not appear; the Court held such conduct intentional and intended to harass the Petitioners. The Trial Court was directed to proceed with the Closure Report irrespective of the Complainant's appearance, and the petitions were disposed of with liberty to the Petitioners to seek appropriate remedy, in accordance with law, if any order is made on the Closure Report.

$~13 to 16

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

- CRL.M.C. 3121/2017, CRL.M.A. 12879/2017 (stay), CRL. M.A.12880/2017 (Exemption), CRL.M.A. 12828/2018 (for modification)

DEEPAK EAPEN JACOB .....Petitioner Through: Mr. P.K. Dubey, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Nitin Sharma, Ms. Snehima Jauhari, Advocates. versus STATE & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Shoaib Haider, APP for the State. Counsel for Complainant (appearance not given) 14 CRL.M.C. 3129/2017, CRL.M.A. 12929/2017 (stay), CRL.M.A.12930/2017 (Exemption), CRL.M.A. 12830/2018 (for modification)

SANJAY GUPTA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. P.K. Dubey, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Nitin Sharma, Ms. Snehima Jauhari, Advocates. versus STATE & ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Shoaib Haider, APP for the State. Counsel for Complainant (appearance not given) 15 CRL.M.C. 3130/2017, CRL.M.A. 12931/2017 (stay), CRL.M.A.12932/2017(Exemption), CRL.M.A. 12829/2018 (for modification) STAR INDIA PVT LTD .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Pramod Kumar Dubey, Sr. Adv., Ms. Ruby Singh Ahuja, Adv., Mr. Sandeep Kapur, Adv., Mr. Rose

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 11/12/2025 at 12:41:40

Verma, Adv., Mr. Tribhuvan Narain Singh, Adv., Mr. Joy Banerjee, Adv., Mr. Satyam Sharma, Adv., Ms. Muskan Sharma, Adv., Mr. Yash Saxena, Adv., Ms. Khushi Arora, Adv.

versus STATE & ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Shoaib Haider, APP for the State. Counsel for Complainant (appearance not given)

16

CRL.M.C. 3131/2017, CRL.M.A. 12933/2017 (stay), CRL.M.A.12934/2017 (Exemption), CRL.M.A. 12827/2018 (for modification) UDAY SHANKAR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Pramod Kumar Dubey, Sr. Adv., Ms. Ruby Singh Ahuja, Adv., Mr. Sandeep Kapur, Adv., Mr. Rose Verma, Adv., Mr. Tribhuvan Narain Singh, Adv., Mr. Joy Banerjee, Adv., Mr. Satyam Sharma, Adv., Ms. Muskan Sharma, Adv., Mr. Yash Saxena, Adv., Ms. Khushi Arora, Adv.

versus STATE & ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. Shoaib Haider, APP for the State. Counsel for Complainant (appearance not given)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA

O R D E R % 09.12.2025

The Petitions under Section 482/483 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 have been filed on behalf of the Petitioner for setting-aside

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 11/12/2025 at 12:41:40

the Order dated 21.07.2017 under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. whereby directions have been issued to DCP, EOW, the Respondent No. 1, to register FIR under Section 418/420 read with Section 120-B IPC and Section 34 IPC against the thirteen persons named in the Complaint Case No. 5840/2017 dated 20.03.2017.

Pursuant to the Order dated 21.07.2017 of the learned CMM, New Delhi District, Patiala House Court, New Delhi, FIR No. 128/2017 was registered. However, the learned Additional PP submits that the Closure Report has been filed in the said FIR in the year 2020 and the same is pending consideration before the learned Trial Court.

Learned counsel for the Complainant has appeared but that despite the Order dated 25.03.2025, neither any address of the Complainant, has been furnished nor has he chosen to appear before the learned Trial Court. It is evident that conduct of the Complainant is intentional and is only intended to harass the Petitioners.

In the circumstances, the learned Trial Court is directed to proceed with the Closure Report submitted by the Petitioners irrespective of the appearance of the Complainant, who has notice of the same and has deliberately not been appearing before the learned Trial Court.

Considering that this Order is challenging the Application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., pursuant to which FIR has been registered and the Closure Report has already been filed and no Protest Petition till dated has been filed by the Petitioners, the present Petition is disposed of with liberty to the Petitioners to seek appropriate remedy, in accordance with law, in case there is any Order made in the Closure Report submitted in the FIR.

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 11/12/2025 at 12:41:40

The Petitions are disposed of accordingly. The pending Applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J

DECEMBER 9, 2025/RS

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 11/12/2025 at 12:41:40