Delhi High Court - Orders
Santosh Kumar vs The State (Gnctd) And Anr on 17 November, 2025
Author: Sanjeev Narula
Bench: Sanjeev Narula
$~70
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 8145/2025, CRL.M.A. 34039-34040/2025
SANTOSH KUMAR .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Vaibhav Gupta, Ms. Shriya
Agrawal, Mr. D.S. Bangari and
Mr. Mohit Gupta, Advocates.
versus
THE STATE (GNCTD) AND ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Hitesh Vali, APP for State with
SI Manish Dahiya, PS-Budh Vihar.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
ORDER
% 17.11.2025
1. The Petitioner had filed CRL.REV.P 93/2025 titled Santosh Kumar v. Suresh Bansal & Anr., assailing the order of the SDM under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. In the said petition, by order dated 21st March, 2025, the operation of the impugned SDM order was stayed. Then, Respondent No. 2 and others appeared on service of summons and the interim direction was continued from time to time. However, the said proceedings eventually came to be dismissed by the impugned order dated 9th October, 2025. The impugned order reads as follows:
"The present revision petition has been filed to set aside order dt. 18.02.2025 passed in case no. F.S DM Court Rohini/2023/36 by the SDM court.
The revision was put up for arguments on maintainability as the one other revision filed by the same revisionist against the same order had 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 18/11/2025 at 21:39:19 already been disposed off by the parallel court of Sh. Babru Bhan, Ld. ASJ on 08.05.2025.
The Ld. counsel for the revisionist was asked as to why the present revision petition has been filed when the other revision petition filed by revisionist had already been disposed off. To this query, Ld. counsel for the revisionist replied that this revision petition was filed first and the second revision petition was filed by some other counsel but the second revision petition was disposed off prior to disposal of present revision.
The reply given by the counsel does not justify the continuation of present revision petition when the disposal of first revision petition was in knowledge of the party. As the similar revision petition had already been disposed off on 08.05.2025 by the parrallel court with detail order, the present revision petition is not maintainable, hence, the same is dismissed.
TCR be sent back to the concerned court.
File be consigned to Record Room."
2. The impugned order refers to the decision of the Sessions Court dated 8th May, 2025 in CRL.REV.P No. 96/2025 titled Santosh Kumar v. Suresh Bansal & Anr., indicating that two revisions came to be filed against the same SDM order. In CRL.REV.P 93/2025, an interim stay had been granted and the proceedings were being pursued. The second petition was registered as CRL.REV.P 96/2025, where, as noted in the order dated 8th May, 2025, there was no appearance on behalf of the Petitioner; nevertheless, the Court proceeded to examine the matter on merits and dismissed the same. Relying on this earlier dismissal, the Revisional Court thereafter held CRL.REV.P 93/2025 to be not maintainable.
3. This situation appears to have arisen from an inadvertent mistake on the part of Petitioner's counsel at the stage of filing. It is explained that due to technical issues on the e-filing portal, the Petitioner's counsel uploaded the same revision twice under different filing entries, resulting in two separate registrations. It is submitted that there was no change of counsel and that the duplication was purely clerical.
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 18/11/2025 at 21:39:19
4. Although the Court does not presently have the vakalatnamas relating to both filings before it to form a definitive view, yet considering that CRL.REV.P 93/2025 was the petition being actively pursued and that CRL.REV.P 96/2025 came to be decided on merits without hearing the Petitioner, this Court finds it appropriate, in the peculiar facts, to direct stay of the operation of the SDM's order dated 18th February, 2025 till the next date of hearing.
5. Counsel for the Petitioner shall place on record certified copies of the vakalatnamas pertaining to both revision petitions, before the next date.
6. Issue notice. Mr. Hitesh Vali, APP for the State, accepts notice.
7. Issue notice to Respondent No. 2, upon filing of process fee, by all permissible modes returnable on 13th January, 2026.
SANJEEV NARULA, J NOVEMBER 17, 2025 nk 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 18/11/2025 at 21:39:19