Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Govt.Of Nct Of Delhi vs State Of U.P.. on 7 January, 2014
ì%
ITEM NO.13 Court No.4 SECTION II
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl) No(s).6765-6766/2010
(From the judgement and order dated 26/04/2010 in CRMWP No.6207/2010,CRMWP
No.6208/2010 of The HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD)
GOVT.OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF U.P.& ORS. Respondent(s)
(With appln(s) for stay and permission to file additional documents and
exemption from filing O.T. and office report)
Date: 07/01/2014 These Petitions were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE B.S. CHAUHAN
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE J. CHELAMESWAR
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.Y. EQBAL
For Petitioner(s) Mr. P.P. Malhotra, ASG
Ms. Anjani Aiyagari, Adv.
Mr. P.K. Dey, Adv.
Mr. D.S. Mahra, Adv.
Mrs Anil Katiyar,Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. K.K. Tyagi, Adv.
Mr. Iftekhar Ahmed, Adv.
Mr. P. Narasimhan,Adv.
Mr. P.N. Misra, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Abhisth Kumar, Adv.
Ms. Pallavi Pratap, Adv.
Mr. Kamlendra Mishra ,Adv
UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
These petitions have been filed against the judgment and order dated 26.4.2010 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition Nos. 6207 and 6208 of 2010 by which the High Court has dismissed the writ petitions for quashing the criminal case against the Delhi Police officials.
-2-Mr. P.P. Malhotra, learned ASG has placed a very heavy reliance upon the report submitted by Assistant Inspector General of Police (Crime Branch), Lucknow dated 10th October, 2012 wherein the communication had been made by the said AIG to the Special Secretary, Home(Police), Government of UP, Lucknow, in respect of these cases making various observations and coming to the conclusion that the Crime Case No. 597/2009 and 599/2009 filed by the respondent no. 4 against Delhi Police officials were found to be false after investigation by the police. Thus, it should be relied upon and all the proceedings against the officials of the Delhi Police should be quashed and the judgment and order impugned be set aside.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 4 and the other parties have suggested that it is not a proper forum to examine the correctness of the said report submitted by the Assistant Inspector General of Police to the Home Secretary. If petitioners are aggrieved, they must file all the documents, not only the report but also the documents on the basis of which the said report has been prepared, before the concerned Court at Meerut and ask for appropriate relief.
In view of the above, we dispose of these petitions with the direction that in case the petitioners approach the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Meerut, he may examine their grievance and pass appropriate order on the application, if filed for any relief. As these developments took place after the impugned judgment of the High Court, we request the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate to consider the grievance of the petitioners without being influenced by any observation made by the High Court. More so, in the facts and circumstances of the case, there was no occasion for the High Court to pass strictures against the police officials, the same stands expunged.
Needless to say that before passing any order, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Meerut shall also give an opportunity of hearing to the complainant(s).
With these observations, the special leave petitions are disposed of.
| (DEEPAK MANSUKHANI) |(M.S. NEGI) | | Court Master | Assistant Registrar |