Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi District Court

Kanwaljeet Kaur vs Kunal Sehgal Etc) on 18 May, 2022

  IN THE COURT OF SH. LOKESH KUMAR SHARMA
          ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE (SFTC) :
          DWARKA COURTS : NEW DELHI

CNR No: DLSW01­002887­2022
CR No: 117/2022
U/s: 397 CrPC
U/s: 420/424/468/471/506/120B/34 IPC
PS: Najafgarh
(In CC No: 5002734/2016
Kanwaljeet Kaur V/s Kunal Sehgal etc)

Smt. Kawaljeet Kaur
W/o Late Sh. Bhupinder Singh
R/o: A­158, Second Floor,
Ganesh Nagar, New Delhi - 110018
                                          ....REVISIONIST
                           Versus

1. Sh. Kunal Sehgal
S/o Sh. Ripu Daman Sehgal
R/o: F­480, Second Floor,
Vikas Puri, New Delhi - 110018

2. Sh. M.K.Sehgal
S/o Sh. Jagat Singh
R/o: C­7, Milap Nagar,
Uttam Nagar, New Delhi - 110059

Also at
RZ­40A, Part - 1, South Extension,
Uttam Nagar, New Delhi - 110059

3. Sh. Sanjay Girdhar
S/o Late Sh. Bhagwan Dass
R/o: 699­A, Nawada Bazar,
Najafgarh, New Delhi - 110043
                                        ....RESPONDENT(s)


CR No: 117/2022                                  Page 1 of 3
       Date of Institution             :      29.03.2022
      Order reserved on               :      18.05.2022
      Date of Decision                :      18.05.2022


                            ORDER

1. The present petition has arisen out of an order dated 18.02.2021, passed by the Court of Sh. Dev Saroha, ld. MM­07, South West, Dwarka in complaint case no: 5002734/2016, titled as Kanwaljeet Kaur v/s Kunal Sehgal & Ors., vide which ld. MM was pleased to decline the summoning of respondents arrayed as accused persons in the original complaint.

2. The revision petition was received in this Court on 29.03.2022, when at the very outset the Court had raised an objection regarding its maintainability in its present form, as an order declining the summoning of accused persons amounted to their acquittal and since it is a complaint case, hence, shall be governed by the provision of Section 378(4) CrPC, which provides that if any order of acquittal is passed in any case instituted upon a complaint, then it is incumbent upon the aggrieved person firstly to obtain a leave from the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi and then only, he can prefer an appeal against the said order of acquittal.

3. On the query raised by the Court, proxy Counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner had sought time to address CR No: 117/2022 Page 2 of 3 arguments. However, none had appeared on her behalf on the last date of hearing.

4. Today also, none has preferred to appear on behalf of the petitioner. Hence, I am of the considered opinion that the present revision petition filed u/s 397 CrPC is not an appropriate remedy available to the petitioner and the appropriate course for her would be to have applied for an application for leave to appeal before Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. Thus, the petition is dismissed as being not maintainable.

5. With these observations, the revision petition is dismissed as being not maintainable. Copy of the order be sent to the ld. Trial Court concerned for information. Revision petition be consigned to record room after compliance of the necessary legal formalities.

ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT
DATED: 18.05.2022
                  LOKESH         Digitally signed
                                 by LOKESH
                  KUMAR          KUMAR SHARMA
                                 Date: 2022.05.18
                  SHARMA         12:57:32 +0530
               (LOKESH KUMAR SHARMA)
              ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE (SFTC)
              DWARKA COURTS : NEW DELHI




CR No: 117/2022                                         Page 3 of 3