Delhi District Court
Ronen Chatterjee vs . State (Nct Of Delhi) on 20 January, 2020
IN THE COURT OF MS. NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA:
DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE
SOUTH - EAST, SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI
CA No. 546/2019
RONEN CHATTERJEE Vs. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)
FIR No. 02 /2017
PS Lodhi Colony
Sh. Ronen Chatterjee S/o Sh. Bhaskar Chatterjee
R/o: House No. 3, Vasant Vihar, SouthWest,
New Delhi. .......... Appellant
VERSUS
1. State (NCT of Delhi) .......... Respondent No. 1
2. SI Lala Ram .......... Respondent No. 2
3. Ct. Iqbal Rathi .......... Respondent No. 3
Date of filing of Appeal : 24.10.2019
Arguments heard : 14.01.2020
Order pronounced : 20.01.2020
ORDER:
1. The present Appeal under Section 341 Cr. P. C. read with Section 382 Cr. P. C. has been filed against the order dated 13.09.2019 vide which the Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate has dismissed in default the application under Section 340 Cr. P. C. filed by the Appellant Sh. Ronen Chatterjee.
2. It is submitted that the application under Section 340 Cr. P. C. was filed before the Court of Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate on 19.08.2019 CA No. 546/2019; RONEN CHATTERJEE Vs. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) FIR No. 02 /2017; PS Lodhi Colony Page No. 1 of 4 and the same was adjourned for 13.09.2019 to be taken up at 12.30 pm. However, when the counsel for the Appellant appeared in the matter at 02.00 pm, he was informed that the application under Section 340 Cr. P. C. was dismissed for nonprosecution.
3. It is submitted that no opportunity has been to the Appellant for addressing his submissions on the application. The "Audi Alteram Partem" Principle of Rule of Law has been denied to the appellant.
4. It is asserted that there are some rotten elements in the system, who have tarnished the image of the coveted police force of Delhi and the same need to be weeded out. This application has merit as it is the case where police have forged and fabricated the evidence in order to favour the complainant. A prayer is, therefore, made that the Appeal may be allowed and the Appellant may be given an opportunity to lead evidence on application under Section 340 Cr.P.C.
5. Notice has been served on the Respondents i.e. SI Lala Ram and Ct. Iqbal Rathi, who have submitted the Action Taken Report.
6. In the Action Taken Report, it is submitted that a complaint was made by Sh. Sahil Goel that on 04.05.2016 he was sitting on the front seat of the auditorium, where PG Convocation Programme was going on. The guest/Appellant Ronen Chatterjee was occupying the seat next to him who slapped and beat him and also threw chair at him. He suffered injuries on his head and left ear. PCR Van came and took him to AIIMS Trauma Center, New Delhi and on his complaint NonCognizable Offence was made out and hence the CA No. 546/2019; RONEN CHATTERJEE Vs. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) FIR No. 02 /2017; PS Lodhi Colony Page No. 2 of 4 complainant was advised that he could approach the Court for registration of the case.
7. Accordingly, on 21.10.2019 the complainant moved the application under Section 156(3) Cr. P. C. before the Court and final report was submitted by the police under Section 155 (2) Cr. P. C. The matter was investigated on the directions of the SHO PS Lodhi Colony and the statement of the witnesses were recorded. The CD of videography was obtained and referred to the Department of Forensic Medicines, AIIMS, New Delhi from where final opinion was obtained. It is submitted that the Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate has taken the cognizance in this matter on 30.01.2018 against the Appellant. It is further submitted that during the Court proceedings, matter was settled between the parties in the Mediation Center and the case was closed vide order dated 16.02.2018.
8. I have heard the arguments and perused the record. My observations are as under:
9. It is the case where as per the prosecution, a fight took place between the Appellant and the complainant Sh. Sahil Goel. Further, as the matter was under trial before the Court of Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate, it was settled through Mediation Center and accordingly in view of the compromise, the case had been disposed of. However, subsequently an application under Section 340 Cr. P. C. has been filed by the Appellant/ Sh. Ronen Chatterjee wherein allegations have been made that the CD containing the videography of the scene of incident has been manipulated and false evidence has been CA No. 546/2019; RONEN CHATTERJEE Vs. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) FIR No. 02 /2017; PS Lodhi Colony Page No. 3 of 4 submitted by the police. The application under Section 340 Cr. P. C. was listed for 13.09.2019 at 12.30 pm for consideration.
10.Ld. Counsel for the Appellant has submitted that the matter was listed for 12.30 pm, but inadvertently it was noted that the matter would be taken up at 02.00 pm. However, when he appeared at 02.00 pm, he came to know that the application under Section 340 Cr. P. C. has already been dismissed in default as well as for non prosecution. He further submitted that one opportunity is sought for addressing the arguments on the application under Section 340 Cr. P. C.
11.In view of above considering the submissions made, one opportunity is given to the Appellant to address the arguments on the application under Section 340 Cr. P. C. Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate may dispose of the application on merits as per law. The impugned order dated 13.09.2019 is setaside and the Appeal is allowed.
12. Trial Court Record be sent back alongwith a copy of this order.
13. Parties to appear before the Ld. Trial Court on 07.02.2020.
14. Revision Petition be consigned to Record Room.
Announced in the open Court (Neena Bansal Krishna)
on 20.01.2020 District & Sessions Judge
(KSR) South East, Saket Courts,
New Delhi
CA No. 546/2019; RONEN CHATTERJEE Vs. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) FIR No. 02 /2017; PS Lodhi Colony Page No. 4 of 4