Delhi High Court - Orders
Fiitjee Ltd vs M/S Bennett Coleman And Co Ltd on 24 April, 2024
$~123
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.REV.P. 530/2024
FIITJEE LTD ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Pramod Dubey, Sr. Adv. and Mr.
Upmanyu Hazarika, Sr. Adv. with
Mr. Raaj Malhotra, Mr. Rahul Goyal,
Mr. Pranjal Abrol, Mr. Ayush Sachan
and Mr. Chaitanya Singh, Advs.
versus
M/S BENNETT COLEMAN AND CO LTD ..... Respondent
Through:
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJAN
ORDER
% 24.04.2024 CRL.M.A. 11918/2024 (exemption)
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. Application stands disposed of.
CRL.REV.P.530/20243. The present petition has been filed against the impugned order dated 11.12.2023 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate-05, South District, New Delhi whereby the accused persons were discharged of the offence under Sections 499/500/501/502 IPC.
4. The learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the learned Trial Court has discharged the accused persons at the stage of framing of notice under Section 251 Cr.PC. which is not This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 29/04/2024 at 21:09:57 permissible. In support of his contention, the learned senior counsel has placed reliance on the decision of this Court in Court on its own motion vs. State (2022:DHC:1932:DB) wherein it has been held that Magistrate does not have the power to discharge the accused upon his appearance in Court in a summon trial case based upon a complaint. Learned senior counsel submits that the present case arises out of a complaint case which is a summon trial case and the provisions of Section 239 Cr.P.C. are not applicable. He submits that reliance placed by the learned Trial Court as the decision in Bhushan Kumar v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2012) 5 SCC 424, is misplaced.
5. Further inviting attention of the Court to para 14 of the impugned judgment, the learned senior counsel contends that there is specific observation made by the learned Trial Court that the learned predecessor had concluded that there are sufficient grounds for summoning of the accused Nos.1 to 15 for offences under Sections 499/500/501/502/34 IPC, therefore, the impugned judgment whereby the accused persons have been discharged of the said offences, tantamounts to review of the decision which is not permissible under the criminal jurisprudence.
6. In view of the above, issue notice to the respondent by all permissible modes, returnable on 16.08.2024.
VIKAS MAHAJAN, J APRIL 24, 2024/ns This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 29/04/2024 at 21:09:57