Single judge oral oral order disposing of writ petitions challenging trial proceedings and seeking compensation for alleged delay and fabrication of evidence. Petitioner claims loss of livelihood due to 27-year trial. Court observed that claims regarding compensation must be addressed in the trial court.
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.
$~14
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of decision: 17th February, 2025
+ W.P.(CRL) 3485/2018, CRL.M.A. 18020/2023, CRL.M.A. 25684/2023, CRL.M.A. 37182/2024
DR. R.K. JAIN
S/O LATE SH.S.P.JAIN, R/O B-13/S1, DILSHAD GARDEN, DELHI
.....Petitioner
Through: Petitioner in person. versus
THE STATE, NCT DELHI
.....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel for the State with Mr. Abhinav Kumar Arya and Mr. Aryan Sachdeva, Advocates and SI Vicky Kumar P.S. Preet Vihar.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
J U D G M E N T (oral)
(i) the digitized record annexed to the Appeal is not of the
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(CRL) 3485/2018 Page 1 of 4
Digitally Signed By:VIKAS ARORA Signing Da te:2 2.02.2025 13:57:33
complete record and various documents as specified therein which are though available in the physical file of the learned Trial Court, has not been intentionally digitized and placed before this Court;
(ii) for registration of FIR against the Complainant Anuradha Jain and the public functionaries for the documented fraud and other cognizable offences punishable under Section 108/109/120B/181/191/192/193/195/196/198/l99/200/208/209/21 1/304/307/380/384/406/411/418/420/466/468/469/471/ 474/477-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’ hereinafter) and also separate FIR against the I.O Sh. Sat Narain/the then SHO Gurucharan Singh and ACP P.S. Preet Vihar Mr. Yashveer Singh for fabricating NIL evidence Chargesheet with entire case diaries and VRK record admittedly missing/vanished and also without preparing mandatory Report under Section 168 Cr.P.C.;
(iii) recovery from the corrupt I.O of the various goods mentioned therein and direct a time-bound probe by a sitting/retired Judge of this Court to identify and enable prosecution of the persons who have patronized the glaring preplanned fraud and forgery by the complainant and her coterie in criminal collusion; and
(iv) to bring on record the original documents and award compensation in the sum of Rs.83,46,23,682/- as on 30.09.2024 for infringement of his fundamental right to livelihood and live with dignity and to impose exemplary cost and to award the cost
Signature Not Verified
Page 2 of 4
W.P.(CRL) 3485/2018
Digitally Signed By:VIKAS ARORA Signing Da te:2 2.02.2025 13:57:33
of litigation to the Petitioner.
Signature Not Verified
Page 3 of 4
W.P.(CRL) 3485/2018
Digitally Signed By:VIKAS ARORA Signing Da te:2 2.02.2025 13:57:33
Petition.
(NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA) JUDGE
FEBRUARY 17, 2025
va
Signature Not Verified
Page 4 of 4
W.P.(CRL) 3485/2018
Digitally Signed By:VIKAS ARORA Signing Da te:2 2.02.2025 13:57:33
Dr. R.K. Jain
The State, NCT Delhi
Neena Bansal Krishna
As recorded by the court registry
A constitutional writ petition in a criminal context, most commonly habeas corpus or a challenge to an FIR or detention order.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
