Delhi High Court - Orders
Mr.Anthony Patrick vs State Nct Of Delhi on 2 February, 2022
Author: Rajnish Bhatnagar
Bench: Rajnish Bhatnagar
(VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING)
$~52
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 473/2022
MR.ANTHONY PATRICK ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. P. Mohith Rao, Advocate.
versus
STATE NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent
Through: Dr. M P Singh, APP for the State with
SI Satish Kumar Yadav, PS IGI
Airport.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNISH BHATNAGAR
ORDER
% 02.02.2022 CRL.M.A. 2128/2022 (for exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of.
CRL.M.C. 473/2022 and CRL.M.A. 2127/2022 (for interim relief)
1. This is a petition filed by the petitioner under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeing quashing of Notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. issued by Police Station Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi, in FIR No. 312/2021 under Sections 420/468/471 IPC and Section 12 of the Passports Act, 1967.
2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is a old and sick man and is suffering from piles, loose stools, high blood pressure and sugar. He has also placed on record discharged summary from hospital dated 22.12.2021. Learned counsel places reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case titled as Roshni Biswas Vs. State of West Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:KAMAL KANT MENDIRATTA Signing Date:04.02.2022 18:23 (VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING) Bengal and Ars. in SLP (Cril) No. 4937/2020, to contend that petitioner be allowed to join investigation through video conference as has been allowed by the Supreme Court in the said case.
3. Issue notice. Learned APP for the State enters appearance on advance notice and accepts notice.
4. First of all, as far as the judgment in the case of Roshni Biswas (supra) is concerned, in that case petitioner was a lady and the said case revolves around its own facts.
5. It is submitted by learned APP for the State that petitioner is also involved in another FIR No. 321/201 under Sectons 420/467/468/471 IPC and Section 24 EA of the Passports Act. It is further submitted that petitioner had provided fake viza for Czech Republic to three passengers who were apprehended at IGI Airport. He further submits that IO of this case had gone to the native place of the petitioner, but his office was found locked and mobile phone was also switched off, therefore, the only option left with the IO was to affix notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. on the wall of the church, i.e. where the office of the petitioner is situated.
6. Looking into the nature of allegations against the petitioner and also considering the fact that investigation cannot be stopped in this manner, no ground for quashing of Notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. is made out.
7. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
8. Petitioner is directed to join investigation as and when directed by the IO.
RAJNISH BHATNAGAR, J FEBRUARY 2, 2022/ AK Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:KAMAL KANT MENDIRATTA Signing Date:04.02.2022 18:23