Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi District Court

Mohan Lal vs State (Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi) on 12 February, 2013

                                                      :1:

         IN THE COURT OF SHRI YASHWANT KUMAR, ADDL. 
                     SESSIONS JUDGE: N/W: ROHINI: DELHI


Criminal Revision No. 11/13


Mohan Lal
S/o Sh. Sher Singh
R/o E­10, Altinho, Panaji, Goa                               ...    Revisionist 


                                                    Versus


      1. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)
      2. Mr. Sandeep Aggarwal (alias Sanju)
         S/o Mr. Bal Kishan Aggarwal (alias Baalle)
         R/o 70, Second Floor, Tagore Park
         Delhi­110009                           ...                 Respondents


ORDER

1. The present revision has been filed u/s. 397 Cr.P.C. against the summoning order dated 10.10.2011 passed by Shri Neeraj Gaur, Ld. M.M., Rohini Courts, Delhi in Complaint Case no. 4995/06, U/s 417/34 IPC.

2. TCR has been summoned which is tagged with the Crl. Rev. No. 11/13; Mohan Lal Vs. State & Anr.

connected revision petition no. 10/13. I have heard ld. Counsel for the revisionist as well as Ld. Addl. P.P. for the State/respondent no.1 and have perused the materials on record.

3. The ld. Counsel for the revisionist argued that there is no iota of evidence on record to show that prior to the marriage, the accused no.1 was suffering from chronic schizophrenia. Whereas, the complainant himself is guilty of fraud and cheating and also of domestic violence since he has got her signatures on four blank papers and also got created some purported medical OPD papers. No original papers filed on record before the Ld. Trial Court. Even it is not clear as to what damage or harm to the body, mind, reputation of the complainant has been caused. Whereas, the Ld. APP for the state/ respondent no.1 argued that after considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Trial Court has rightly passed the order for summoning the accused no. 2 Mohan Lal and accused no. 3 Neena Rani Goel.

4. I have perused the order dated 10.10.2011 of the Ld. Crl. Rev. No. 11/13; Mohan Lal Vs. State & Anr.

Trial Court and the materials placed on record and found that there is a prima facie evidence against the revisionist/accused that he and his wife had the knowledge of mental condition of their daughter thereby induced the complainant/respondent no.2 to marry their daughter. Therefore, this revision petition is devoid of merits and the same is dismissed. Copy of this order be sent to the trial court. File of revision petition be consigned to record room.

Announced in open Court                                            (YASHWANT KUMAR)
On 12  February, 2013                                          ASJ­03 (N/W)ROHINI 
           th


                                                                     DELHI

Crl. Rev. No. 11/13; Mohan Lal Vs. State & Anr.