Delhi High Court - Orders
State Nct Of Delhi vs Sushil Kumar Garg on 28 May, 2021
Author: Yogesh Khanna
Bench: Yogesh Khanna
$~27
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 1365/2021
STATE NCT OF DELHI ..... Petitioner
Through : Mr.Amit Ahlawat, APP for the State
with Inspector Rajender Kumar PS
Karawal Nagar Delhi.
versus
SUSHIL KUMAR GARG ..... Respondent
Through : None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA
ORDER
% 28.05.2021
1. The hearing has been conducted through Video Conferencing.
CRL.M.A. 8304/20212. Exemption allowed, subject to the condition that petitioner will file the duly sworn/attested affidavit and the requisite Court fee within 72 hours from the date of resumption of the regular functioning of this Court.
3. The application stands disposed of.
CRL.M.A. 8303/20214. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
5. The application stands disposed of.
CRL.M.C. 1365/2021 & CRL.M.A. 8302/2021
6. This petition is filed with following prayer :
a) Set aside the impugned order dated 08.02.2021 passed by Shri Ramesh Kumar, Ld. Principal District & Sessions Judge, North-East, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi in FIR No. 356/16 PS Karawal Nagar U/s 186/353/332/341/34 IPC and Section 23/25 PC & PNDT Act whereby upheld the order dated 11.02.2020 of the Ld. CMM and dismissed the revision petition filed by the State against the CMM order dated 11/02/2020;
7. It is the submission of the learned APP for the State that on Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PRADEEP SHARMA Signing Date:28.05.2021 15:57 11.02.2020 an application for release of articles seized during personal search was moved by the accused/respondent on which the Investigating Officer had replied he has no objection in case the articles are released to the accused. In view of such statement the application was allowed and the articles were directed to be released to respondent/accused.
8. The said order dated 11.02.2020 passed by the learned Magistrate in FIR No.356/2016 was challenged before the Court of District and Session's Judge which vide order dated 08.02.2021 in CRL.REV.PET.15/2020 had held that the Investigating Officer since has given a no objection qua release of such articles, hence there is no force in the revision petition and it was accordingly dismissed. The learned APP for the State submits if one peruse the personal search memo dated 19.10.2016, it reveals no personal seizure was made from the accused and only a document.
9. It is the grievance of the learned APP for the State despite the fact in personal search memo no seizure has been made yet the learned Additional Session's Judge granted release of case property seized in present matter which is Logic 400 Pro Series; Wipro GE Medical System Model No.2302111, Serial No.35378W59; Cash Memo book S.No.34001 to 34100; Certificate of PC and PNDT Registration; Registration Forms; Master Register etc. It is the submission that these articles are the case property and are required during the evidence and even as per the proviso of Section 29 of PC and PNDT Act, the case property need not be returned. The said proviso is as under:
" 29. Maintenance of records.
1. xxxx Provided that, if any criminal or other proceedings are instituted against any Genetic Counsel- ling Centre, Genetic Laboratory or Genetic Clinic, the records and all other documents of such Centre, Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PRADEEP SHARMA Signing Date:28.05.2021 15:57 Laboratory or Clinic shall be preserved till the final disposal of such proceedings."
10. In the circumstances, issue notice to the respondent through all modes including email and whatsapp returnable on 10.09.2021 and in the meanwhile the impugned order shall remain stayed till the next date.
YOGESH KHANNA, J.
MAY 28, 2021 DU Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PRADEEP SHARMA Signing Date:28.05.2021 15:57