Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Delhi District Court

Shiv Gopal Awasthi vs Serious Fraud Investigation Officer on 7 June, 2018

                                        1 


                          
IN THE COURT OF SH.NARINDER KUMAR:SPECIAL JUDGE­2
NDPS ACT:(CENTRAL DISTRICT):TIS HAZARI COURT:DELHI

Crl. Rev. No. 393/ 2018          

Date of institution: 30.05.2018     Decided on: 07.06.2018

 In the matter of :

Shiv Gopal Awasthi                                       .....Petitioner

Versus

Serious Fraud Investigation Officer 
(SFIO)                                                     .....Respondent     
                            
                               
                                         JUDGMENT

Present revision petition has been filed challenging order   dated   05.02.2018   passed   by   learned   Additional   Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Special Acts), Central District, Delhi, in complaint case no. 293443/16.

 2 

2. Vide   the   impugned   order,   learned   Trial   Court observed that "there is sufficient material available on record to frame charge against accused no. 4­appellant herein, for offence under Section 120B read with Section 420 IPC, 468, 471 IPC, and   then   adjourned   the   matter   to   21.03.2018   for   framing   of charge.

3. Charge   was   yet   to   be   framed,   but   the   present petition came to be filed.

4. While going through observations made by learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate in para 12, Court finds that learned Trial Court was of the prima facie view that offence of   forgery   for  the   purpose   of  cheating  was committed  by  the accused and further that offence of use of forged documents as genuine,   was   also   committed   by   him,   in   the   given   facts   and circumstances.

5. Though learned Trial Court observed in the manner above, regarding offence of forgery, cheating and use of forged  3  documents as genuine, in para 14 learned Trial Court ordered for framing of charge only for offence under Section 120B read with Section 420468471 IPC.

6. So para 12 and 14 are not in consonance with each other.

7. In   the   given   situation,   matter   needs   clarification from the learned Trial Court as to for which offences charge was actually to be framed against accused no. 4­ appellant herein i.e. whether the charge was intended to be framed for offence under 120 IPCSection 420 IPC read with Section 120B IPC,  468 IPC read with Section 120B IPC & 471 IPC read with Section 120B IPC?

8. As a result, this revision petition is disposed of with directions  to  the   learned  Trial  Court  to  pass order  on   charge afresh specifying as to for which offences prima facie case   is made   out   against  accused  no. 4­  appellant   so  that   in   case  of challenge, higher Court may appreciate illegality or irregularity,  4  if any, in the order. 

However, learned Trial Court to provide reasonable opportunity of being heard to both the parties before passing of the order.

9. Parties   to   appear   before   Learned   Additional   Chief Metropolitan Magistrate today at 2 pm.

10. Copy of Judgment  be sent to Learned Metropolitan Magistrate.   Trial   court   record   be   sent   back.     File   of   revision petition be consigned to record room. 


                                                          Digitally signed
Announced in the open Court                               by NARINDER
                                             NARINDER     KUMAR
on this 07th day of June, 2018               KUMAR        Date:
                                                          2018.06.08
                                                          15:27:12 +0530

                                             (NARINDER KUMAR)
                              SPECIAL JUDGE, NDPS­02 (CENTRAL)
                                          TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI