Delhi High Court - Orders
Gajender Singh vs C.B.I on 16 September, 2020
Author: Yogesh Khanna
Bench: Yogesh Khanna
$~12
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.REV.P. 294/2020
GAJENDER SINGH
..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Vikram Pawar, Advocate.
versus
C.B.I.
..... Respondent
Through: Mr.Mridul Jain, SPP for CBI.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA
ORDER
% 16.09.2020
1. The hearing has been conducted through Video Conferencing.
Crl.M.A.No.12728/20202. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
3. The application stands disposed of.
CRL.REV.P. 294/2020 & Crl.M.A.Nos.12726-27/2020
4. This revision petition is filed challenging the order dated 13.11.2019 passed by the learned CMM, Rouse Avenue Courts, Delhi in case titled as 'CBI vs Delhi Officials' arising out of RC No.14(S)/97-DLI and all proceedings emanating therefrom.
5. The facts are a case FIR No.261/1996 was registered at PS Roop Nagar, Delhi U/s 394/397/34 IPC, concerning a robbery. The said FIR was investigated by the team of Inspector A.K.Saxena of which included the petitioner herein alongwith other officials. It is submitted an information in the said FIR was received by the police and they went to arrest one Joginder Singh at Mangol Puri where during cross firing one person was killed. On the basis of the statement of SI D.S.Dagar a FIR 907/1996 was registered Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:KAPIL SHARMA Signing Date:16.09.2020 17:16 under Sections 307/186/153 IPC and Section 25/27/54/59 of Arms Act. Since one person died in the said incident, i.e., while trying to apprehend the culprits of FIR No.261/1996, hence an enquiry was conducted by the then SDM, Punjabi Bagh, Delhi who finally opined that there was no foul play in the incident of 11.09.1996. However the matter was taken up by the mother of the deceased in the High Court and investigation was entrusted to the CBI.
6. The CBI case registered FIR bearing RC No.14(S)/97-DLI under Section 302/34 & 201 IPC and on 03.12.1998 the CBI intimated the Court that no case is made out.
7. On 15.12.1998 a final report/closure report was filed before the learned Trial Court which was pending.
8. On 13.11.2019 after nearly 21 years of pendency of the case for considering the final report, the learned CMM rejected the same and took cognizance of Sections 302 read with Section 34 IPC against the petitioner. This order is being challenged by the petitioner herein.
9. Qua the delay it is submitted co-accused filed a revision petition no.28/2020 wherein the NBWs issued against the co-accused were stayed but on 09.09.2020 on the ground the petition does not lie before the learned Session's Court as the matter is pending before High Court it was allowed to be withdrawn with a liberty to file afresh.
10. Issue notice. The learned SPP for CBI is present and accepts the notice. Let the reply if any, be filed by the CBI within six weeks from today with an advance copy to the learned counsel for the petitioner and the same be placed on record as well.
11. List on 05.11.2020 and till then the NBWs issued against the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:KAPIL SHARMA Signing Date:16.09.2020 17:16 petitioner herein shall remain in abeyance.
12. TCR be also requisitioned prior to the next date.
YOGESH KHANNA, J.
SEPTEMBER 16, 2020 DU Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:KAPIL SHARMA Signing Date:16.09.2020 17:16