Delhi District Court
State vs Amresh Chaudhary on 30 July, 2025
IN THE COURT OF DR. NUPUR GUPTA :
CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
SOUTH EAST, SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI
STATE Vs. AMRESH CHAUDHARY
FIR NO. 269/2024
PS (GOVIND PURI)
u/s 3 DPDP ACT
JUDGMENT :-
Srl. No. of the case & Date of Cr CASES 27499/2024 institution 03.07.2024 Date of commission of offence 03.05.2024. Name of the complainant ASI Sushil Sharma.
Name of the accused Amresh Chaudhary. Nature of offence complained of U/S. 3 DPDP Act Plea of the accused person Accused pleaded not guilty Date of reserving order 18.07.2025. Final Order Acquitted u/s. 3 DPDP Act Date of order 30.07.2025.
BRIEF STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DECISION OF THE CASE:-
1. In the present case, accused is facing trial for offence punishable under Section 3 DPDP Act on the allegations that on 03.05.2023, at about 10:00 PM, at Subhash Khand, near Raju Pandit Park, Giri Nagri, Delhi falling within the jurisdiction of PS Govind Puri, one banner containing words "Physics by Amresh Choudhary (18 years exp) Jee (Mains + Advance) XII, XI 9971467782" was found affixed. It is alleged that the accused had affixed the said board containing the above said words on public property in public view.
2. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed on 03.07.2024 and cognizance was taken on the same date. Copy of charge FIR No. 269/2024 State Vs. Amresh Chaudhary Page No. 1/5 Digitally signed by NUPUR NUPUR GUPTA GUPTA Date:
2025.07.30 16:50:58 +0530 sheet was supplied to accused on 29.01.2025 and notice under Section 251 Cr.P.C. for offence punishable U/s. 3 DPDP Act was given to accused on the same date, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3. Before recording of prosecution evidence, accused admitted copy of FIR, Endorsement on rukka and Certificate u/s 65B of IEA, without admitting contents thereof. To prove its case, prosecution has examined two witnesses.
4. PW1 is ASI Sushil Sharma, who is complainant as well as Investigating Officer in the present matter. He deposed that on 03.05.2024, he was posted as ASI at PS Govind Puri and on that day, he was on patrolling duty along with Constable Vishnu Bhati. At about 10:00 AM, they reached at Subhash Khand, near Raju Pandit Park, Giri Nagar, Govind Puri, New Delhi and noticed one board hanging on the grill of the transformer containing the words "Physics By Amresh Chaudhary (18 years experience) JEE (Mains + Advance) XII, XI 9971467782". He then took the photographs of the same and then removed the same from the grill of the transformer. The photograph of the same is Ex.PW1/A. He then seized the banner vide memo which is Ex.PW1/B. Thereafter, he prepared the rukka vide Ex.PW1/C and handed over the same to Constable Vishnu Bhati to get the FIR registered at the PS. After a while, Constable Vishnu Bhati returned to the spot and handed over the copy of FIR, certificate u/s 65B of IEA and original rukka to him as the investigation of the case was marked to him. During the course of investigation, he prepared the site plan at the spot vide memo Ex.PW1/D. Thereafter, they returned to the PS along with the case property and he deposited the case property in the Malkhana. Thereafter, he recorded statement of Constable Vishnu u/s 161 CrPC and placed the same on record. He then contacted on the mobile number which was mentioned on the board and it was responded by you. It is alleged that he asked you to come to the PS and subsequently you went FIR No. 269/2024 State Vs. Amresh Chaudhary Page No. 2/5 Digitally signed by NUPUR NUPUR GUPTA GUPTA Date:
2025.07.30 16:51:07 +0530 to the PS and met him. He then served notice u/s 41 A CrPC upon you vide Ex.PW1/E. He then interrogated you vide interrogation report Ex.PW1/F. After due interrogation, he released you vide pabandinama which is Ex.PW1/G. He correctly identified you and the case property from its photograph. After completion of investigation, he prepared the charge- sheet and submitted the same before the Court. He was then duly cross- examined and discharged.
5. PW2 is Constable Nagesh Takhar, who deposed that on 03.05.2024, he was posted as Constable at PS Govind Puri and on that day, he was on patrolling duty along with ASI Sushil Sharma. At about 10:00 AM, they reached at Subhash Khand, near Raju Pandit Park, Giri Nagar, Govind Puri, New Delhi and noticed one board hanging on the grill of the transformer containing the words "Physics By Amresh Chaudhary (18 years experience)" along with one mobile number and some other words.
ASI Sushil then took the photographs of the same using his mobile phone and then removed the same from the grill of the transformer. He correctly identified the photograph of the same as Ex.PW1/A. ASI Sushil Sharma then seized the banner vide memo Ex.PW1/B. Thereafter, ASI Sushil prepared the rukka and handed over the same to him to get the FIR registered at the PS. He then left the spot and reached at the PS Govind Puri and got present FIR registered through the then Duty Officer. After getting the FIR registered, he returned to the spot and handed over the copy of FIR, certificate u/s 65B of IEA and original rukka to ASI Sushil Sharma as the investigation of the case was marked to him. During the course of investigation, IO / ASI Sushil Sharma prepared the site plan at the spot vide memo Ex.PW1/D. Thereafter, they returned to the PS along with the case property and IO deposited the case property in the Malkhana. Thereafter, IO recorded his statement u/s 161 CrPC and placed the same on record. He was duly cross-examined and discharged.
FIR No. 269/2024 State Vs. Amresh Chaudhary Page No. 3/5Digitally signed by NUPUR NUPUR GUPTA GUPTA Date:
2025.07.30 16:51:14 +0530
6. No other PW was examined by prosecution and PE was closed on 04.06.2025.
7. Statement of accused was recorded U/Sec.313 Cr.P.C. on 18.07.2025, wherein he denied the case of the prosecution and pleaded innocence. However, he declined to lead any defence evidence.
8. Final arguments were advanced at length by both the parties.
9. I have considered the submissions and perused the record carefully.
10. This being a criminal case, the burden of proving guilt of accused lies upon the prosecution for which the standard required is beyond reasonable doubt. The ingredients required to prove offence punishable U/s. 3 DPDP Act in this case are :
a. That the accused has defaced any public property by writing or marking with ink, chalk, paint or any other material;
b. That the public property is situated in public view;
c. That writing or marking on public property in public view was not for indicating the name and address of the owner /occupier of the said property;
d. or that the defacement of public property had been done for benefit of the accused with his knowledge or consent.
11. Now let us examine if the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt against the present accused for offence punishable under Section 3 DPDP Act.
12. The material witness in the present case is complainant/IO himself. Nowhere in the entire charge sheet or in his testimony, complainant/IO has alleged that any person had actually seen the accused putting up/affixing the board at the spot on above mentioned date, time and FIR No. 269/2024 State Vs. Amresh Chaudhary Page No. 4/5 Digitally signed by NUPUR NUPUR GUPTA GUPTA Date:
2025.07.30 16:51:20 +0530 place. Nothing has been produced before court to state that the said board was installed/affixed by the accused himself or at his instance or for his benefit. Complainant/IO has not pointed out specifically anywhere in the entire charge sheet as to how and in what manner he conducted investigation to arrive at the conclusion that it was the accused who had installed/affixed board at the spot on above mentioned date, time and place. There is nothing available on record to suggest that any public person had informed complainant/IO of accused indulging in illegal activities as per Section 3 DPDP Act. Infact, no public person has been named as a witness in the present matter. Furthermore, in cross examination, complainant/IO has admitted that he did not see accused or any other person acting at the behest of accused, installing/affixing the said board. Furthermore, the entire charge sheet is silent if the said board was installed/affixed for the benefit of accused in any manner. The prosecution has not pleaded a case pointing out any benefit accrued to accused as per Section 3(2) DPDP Act.
13. In view of the above discussion, it is clear that there is not even an iota of evidence against accused to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the board had been installed/affixed by accused or at behest of accused and therefore, no offence punishable under Section 3 DPDP Act is made out against accused. Accordingly, accused Amresh Chaudhary is acquitted for offence punishable u/s. 3 DPDP Act.
(Typed directly on Court computer and announced in the open Court on 30.07.2025).
Digitally signedNUPUR by NUPUR GUPTA GUPTA Date: 2025.07.30 16:51:26 +0530 (Dr. Nupur Gupta) Chief Judicial Magistrate, South East, Saket Courts, New Delhi FIR No. 269/2024 State Vs. Amresh Chaudhary Page No. 5/5