Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

-

1. INTRODUCTION

(i) This criminal revision petition has been filed under Section 438 read with Section 440 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 397 read with Section 399 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973), by the revisionist, Mr. Nirmal Sen, challenging the impugned summoning order dated 25.05.2023 passed by the Ld. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (CMM), New Delhi District, NIRMAL SEN Vs. STATE NCT OF DELHI Patiala House Court, in the matter titled "State v. Nirmal Sen & Ors." (FIR No.142/20, PS Special Cell). The revisionist contends that the summoning order was passed mechanically without application of judicial mind, as no prima facie case is made out against him under Sections 506, 507, 509, 354D read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). He further asserts that he has been made a scapegoat, while persons explicitly named in the FIR and the complainant's statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. have not been arrayed as accused. The State opposes the petition, relying on the chargesheet and evidence collected during investigation. Having heard the arguments of both sides and perused the record, this Court proceeds to adjudicate the matter.

(iii) On 31.05.2020, the complainant filed a complaint alleging cyberbullying, threats, stalking, and insults to her modesty following her exposure of the group. This resulted in the registration of the instant FIR No. 142/2020 under Sections 506, 507, 509, 354D read with Section 34 IPC at PS Special Cell, Cyber Crime Unit/IFSO, New Delhi. In her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the complainant named specific individuals--Mahira Bhalla, Harsha Gupta, Mehar Dua, and Harpriya Kaur--as perpetrators of harassment, including threats, sharing of personal details, and creation of hate pages. However, the revisionist was not named in the FIR or this statement.

NIRMAL SEN Vs. STATE NCT OF DELHI

3. IMPUGNED ORDER

(i) The impugned order dated 25.05.2023, passed by the Ld. CMM, reads as follows:

"Fresh chargesheet is filed. It be checked and registered. Present: Ld. APP for the State.

IO SI Vikrant Singh in person with case file.

Heard. Record perused.

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case I take cognizance of offences punishable u/s 506/507/509/354D/34 IPC. There is sufficient material on record to summon accused Nirmal Sen, Chetanya Jangid and Bhawesh Mehta.

3. The impugned order dated 25.05.2023 merely states:

"Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case I take cognizance of offences punishable u/s 506/507/509/354D/34 IPC. There is sufficient material on record to summon accused Nirmal Sen, Chetanya NIRMAL SEN Vs. STATE NCT OF DELHI Jangid and Bhawesh Mehta."

2. This order is bereft of any reasoning, analysis, or consideration of the essential ingredients of the alleged offences. The learned CJM has failed to: