Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

Anshu Aggarwal vs State (Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi) on 11 July, 2023

Author: Vikram Nath

Bench: Vikram Nath

                                                          1

                                             IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                                            CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                          CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1853/2023
                               (@Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.1630/2019)


     ANSHU AGGARWAL & ORS.                                                          Appellant(s)

                                                         VERSUS

     STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI)                                                  Respondent(s)

                                                        O R D E R

1. Leave granted.

2. The First Information Report No.33/2007, Police Station Anand Vihar, Delhi was registered against nine persons viz. Husband, father­in­law, mother­in­law and six other relatives of the appellants.

3. The Metropolitan Magistrate, at the stage of framing of charges, by Order dated 21­03­2015 found that the charge for offence under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code was made out against all the surviving eight accused as one of the accused viz. Mrs. Santosh Aggarwal (mother­in­law) had since died and proceedings against her had abated.

4. The above Order was assailed by way of Revision before the Sessions Court. The Revisional Court vide Order dated 11­01­2016, upheld the framing of charge against the husband and father­in­law and at the same time, directed for discharge of the remaining six Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by VISHAL ANAND accused (being four sisters of the husband and two of his brother­ Date: 2023.07.12 16:53:12 IST Reason: in­law)  2

5. Aggrieved by the Order of the Revisional Court, the State preferred petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 before the High Court. The said petition was allowed and the High Court directed that charges should be framed against all the surviving accused. It is this order which has been challenged before this Court by the four sisters and two of their husbands.

6. Ms. Kiran Suri, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants placed before this Court a photo­stat copy of the certified copy of the Judgment of the Metropolitan Magistrate, Mahila Court­1, East District, Karkardooma Courts, New Delhi in Case No.11664/2016 whereby two accused who were put to trial have been acquitted. The order of the acquittal is an order passed on the finding that the prosecution utterly failed to prove the charges. The said Judgment be placed on record.

7. In view of the said development, it is the submission that no fruitful purpose would be served by proceeding any further against the remaining accused as directed by the High Court. According to the learned Senior Counsel, the same would also result in acquittal when the main accused, i.e., the husband and his father have already been acquitted. It is also stated by learned Senior Counsel that although more than four months have passed but no appeal has been filed till date challenging the order of acquittal to the knowledge of the appellants.

8. In that view of the matter, we are of the considered view that no fruitful purpose would be served by allowing trial to proceed against the present appellants.

9. We, accordingly, set aside the Order of the High Court and uphold the order passed by the Sessions Court discharging these six appellants.

10. The appeal stands allowed as above.

.................J (VIKRAM NATH) ...................J (AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH) NEW DELHI;

11TH JULY, 2023.

                                    4

ITEM NO.12                  COURT NO.12                SECTION II­C

                 S U P R E M E C O U R T O F       I N D I A
                         RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

     Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)       No.1630/2019

(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 16­11­2018 in CRLMC No. 2775/2016 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi) ANSHU AGGARWAL & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) Respondent(s) (IA No. 28530/2019 ­ EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.) Date : 11­07­2023 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM NATH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH For Petitioner(s) Ms. Kiran Suri, Sr. Adv. Mr. S.J. Amith, Adv.

Ms. Aishwarya Kumar, Adv. Ms. Vidushi Garg, Adv.

Mr. Purvesh Buttan, Adv. Dr. (Mrs.) Vipin Gupta, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R

1. Exemption Application is allowed.

2. Leave granted

3. The appeal stands allowed in terms of the signed Order.

  (VISHAL ANAND)                                  (RANJANA SHAILEY)
ASTT. REGISTRAR­cum­PS                           COURT MASTER (NSH)

(Signed Order is placed on the file)