Sh. Mohit Jindal Vs State Govt. of NCT of Dehli and… — Writ and Judicial Review | Delhi HC (2025)

Sh. Mohit Jindal Vs State Govt. of NCT of Dehli and… — Writ and Judicial Review | Delhi HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing refused; Petitioner granted liberty to take all defences at the appropriate stage including at the time of framing of charge. Exemption application CRL.M.A. 4010/2025 allowed subject to just exceptions.

Issue for consideration

Whether FIR No. 650/2024 under Sections 115(2)/126(2)/74/3(5) of BNSS, 2023 registered at P.S. Keshavpuram should be quashed as motivated and mala fide, being an outcome of prior litigation/enmity between the Complainant and the Petitioner. +1 more

Court's answer

There are specific averments in the FIR which prima facie disclose the commission of the offence; whether they are motivated or genuine cannot be decided merely at this stage, as the averments in the chargesheet need to be tested on the anvil of investigations.

Ratio / Principle

The CCTV evidence is supportive and corroborative; it cannot be a basis for falsification of the ocular and other documentary evidence and cannot be the sole basis for quashing of the FIR at this stage.

Key takeaways

Considering the totality of circumstances, there is no ground for quashing of the FIR; however, the Petitioner is at liberty to take all these defences at the appropriate stage, including at the time of framing of charge.ratio¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Neena Bansal Krishna, J.), by order dated 10.02.2025 in W.P.(CRL) 445/2025, declined to quash FIR No. 650/2024 under Sections 115(2)/126(2)/74/3(5) of BNSS, 2023 registered at P.S. Keshavpuram, in a petition filed under Section 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 BNSS. The Court held that the specific averments in the FIR prima facie disclose commission of the offence and whether they are motivated or genuine cannot be decided at that stage, the averments in the chargesheet (already filed on 16.01.2025) needing to be tested on the anvil of investigations. CCTV footage inconclusive about the Petitioner's presence was held to be supportive and corroborative only, incapable of falsifying ocular and other documentary evidence and not a sole basis for quashing. The petition was disposed of with liberty to the Petitioner to take all defences at the appropriate stage, including at framing of charge; exemption application CRL.M.A. 4010/2025 was allowed subject to just exceptions.

$~52

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

- W.P.(CRL) 445/2025, CRL.M.A. 4009/2025

SH. MOHIT JINDAL

.....Petitioner

Through: Mr. Ashok Kumar Garg and Ms. Kavita Agrawal, Advocates.

versus

STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DEHLI AND ANR.

.....Respondent Through: Mr. Rahul Tyagi, Ld. ASC for State.

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA

O R D E R

% 10.02.2025

CRL.M.A. 4010/2025 ( Seeking Exemption )

Allowed, subject to just exceptions.

The Application stands disposed of.

W.P.(CRL) 445/2025

A Criminal Writ Petition under Section 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 BNSS has been filed for quashing of the FIR No.650/2024 under Section 115(2)/126(2)/74/3(5) of BNSS, 2023 registered at P.S. Keshavpuram.

The main grounds on which quashing of FIR is sought is that there a prior litigation between the Complainant and the Petitioner and the present Petition is only an outcome of previous enmity. It is further submitted that the CCTV Footage relied upon by the Prosecution does not show the presence of the Petitioner on the scene of crime. It is, therefore, submitted

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 13/02/2025 at 12:54:59

that the present FIR which is only motivated and mala fide, to be quashed.

Learned Prosecutor on instructions from the I.O., submits that the Chargesheet already stands filed on 16.01.2025. Though the CCTV footage of the venue collected by the I.O., is inconclusive about the presence of the Petitioner on the scene of crime, but the CDR shows the presence of the Petitioner in the same vicinity. It is submitted that there are specific allegations made in the FIR on the basis of which the Chargesheet already stands filed and there is no ground for quashing of FIR. 6. Submissions heard and record perused. 7. There are specific averments made in the FIR which prima facie disclose the commission of the offence. Whether they are motivated or genuine cannot be decided merely at this stage as the averments in Chargesheet need to be tested on the anvil of investigations. Furthermore, the CCTV evidence is supportive and corroborative and cannot be a baisis for falsification of the ocular and other documentary evidence and cannot be the sole basis for quashing of the FIR at this stage.

Considering the totality of circumstances, there is no ground for quashing of FIR. However, the Petitioner is at liberty to take all these defences at the appropriate stage including at the time of framing of charge. 9. The Petition is accordingly disposed of along with the pending Application.

NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J

FEBRUARY 10, 2025/va

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 13/02/2025 at 12:54:59