Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

1. Vide this judgment, I shall decide the Criminal Revision Petition filed under Section 438 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 by the revisionist, assailing the order of the Ld. JMFC-04, West District, THC, Delhi dated 21.04.2025 in Complaint Case No. 943/2024 titled as Kriti Gupta v. Mandeep Singh & Ors. whereby her application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. / 175 (3) BNSS was dismissed and the matter was posted for pre-summoning evidence.

1,50,000/-. The respondents brought some material to the flat and started work, but kept delaying and threatening to discontinue the work if further payment was not made.

2.2 On 27.11.2022, the revisionist made a payment of Rs. 1,50,000/- on the insistence of the respondents. Thereafter, the respondents stopped responding. Upon inquiry, the revisionist came to know that the respondents had removed all the material, fittings, wirings and fixtures from the flat including the material which had not been installed by them and absconded to Dubai. They locked the premises and did not hand over the keys. On 12.05.2023, the revisionist spoke to respondent No.1, who promised to complete the work. On 29.06.2023, the revisionist again paid a sum of Rs. 55,000/- to the respondents and they promised to hand over the said flat by 10.07.2023. The revisionist asked for the refund of the money. The respondents agreed to hand over the flat and refund the money. On 13.08.2023, the accused finally handed over the keys of the flat. The revisionist saw that all the fixtures and electricals had been stolen. Also, the money and valuable from the almirah had been stolen. The revisionist demanded her money back however, since August 2023, the respondents have not answered her calls. The revisionist has claimed that the respondents have cheated her for a sum of Rs. 10,55,000/- besides committing theft from her flat.

Complainant apprised that she has completed her pending work through one Rajman Yadav. In this regard, Rajman Yadav s/o Sh. Sita Ram Yadav r/o H.No. 695,Gali No. 13, Nehru Nagar, Anand Parbat, New Delhi. In this regard, Rajman Yadav was examined and his statement was recorded in which he stated that earlier he was doing work under Mandeep Singh but he was not providing them the raw material and also not paying the wages of labour. Thereafter, he left the work with Mandeep Singh. After sometime, on the request of complainant and Sandeep Singh (Broker) Rajman Yadav ready to complete the pending work of complainant in the total amount of Rs. 2,20,000/-. Rajman Yadav also stated in his statement that when he took the contract of complainant flat, there was only POP work and some tile's work completed and rest all work was in completed.

During, the course of enquiry Sandeep Singh was also examined and he stated that Mandeep Singh has not completed the complainant work and later on the same was completed by Rajman Yadav. Complainant paid again Rs. 2,20,000/- for furnishing of her house work. The alleged persons taken money from the complainant for furnishing her house work and after getting the payment of Rs. 5,55,000/- they left her work without intimation."