fir no. 351/2011 summons to accused ravi and...

FIR No. 351/2011PS S Place

22.03.2016Present : Ld. APP for State.

Complainant with counsel Mr. K.S. Yadav.

Summons to accused Ravi and Manish have not been issued by the

Ahlmad. However, counsel for complainant submits that he wants to file

protest petition qua suspect Ruchika Aggarwal. He is at liberty to do so on or

before the next date of hearing.

IO be also summoned for next date to clarify as to why Ruchika

Aggarwal has been kept under suspect.

Put up for consideration on 30.05.2016.

(Sugandha Aggarwal)CMM (NW) : Rohini 22.03.2016

CC No. 225/1

22.03.2016Present : Complainant with counsel Mr. K.S. Yadav.

Heard. The chargesheet in case FIR No. 351/2011 PS Subhash

Place has been filed. Hence the proceedings of present complaint case stands

clubbed with the proceedings of the chargesheet. Henceforth the ordersheets

of both the cases shall be recorded in the chargesheet.

The file of the complaint case be tagged alongwith the charge

sheet.


CC No. 452/1

22.03.2016Present : Proxy counsel for complainant.

Untraced report has already been filed by the IO. Complainant to

remain present on the next date of hearing. Put up for consideration on the

untraced report on 08.06.2016.


FIR No. 779/2002PS S Vihar


Accused Devra Kittoo and Rakhi Bhatnagar are present with counsel Mr. Dhirender Singh.Accused Vishal is stated to have expired.

Notice for death verification report of accused Vishal has not been

issued by the Ahlmad. Let the death verification report of accused Vishal be

called from the concerned SHO for next date.

Put up for death verification report of accused Vishal on

27.05.2016.




Both accused are present.Mr. Deepak Singh, proxy counsel for accused Shiv Kumar.Mr. Subhash Gulati, counsel for accused Kirti Sharma.

Arguments on charge were heard by my Ld. Predecessor and IO

was called. However, arguments are to be heard afresh. Hence IO shall not be

summoned for next date.

Put up for arguments on charge on 07.05.2016 at 11 AM.




Accused on bail.

It is stated in the MLC that the nature of injuries is simple and

blunt. However, as per the opinion on the MLC the injury is caused on mid

parietal region. It is also stated by the complainant that his head was hit against

the rod in the bus.

IO is directed to seek further opinion on the nature of injuries as

stated in the MLC and file a report on the next date.

Be listed on 26.05.2016.


FIR No. 489/2009PS Ashok Vihar

22.03.2016 Statement of injured Madan Lal, S/o Sh. Munshi Ram Thakur, R/o G12/31, Sector15, Rohini, Delhi.On SA.

With the judicial intervention of the Court, the present matter has

been settled with the accused and today I have received a sum of Rs.22,000/

towards compensation from the accused in full and final settlement of the

dispute. Permission may kindly be given to me to compound the offence u/s

338 IPC. I shall be bound by my statement.

RO & AC (Sugandha Aggarwal) CMM (NW) : Rohini : 22.03.2016


22.03.2016

Statement of accused Arun Kumar, S/o Sh. S.P. Singh, R/o BB40C, Shalimar Bagh, Delhi.On SA.

I am making this statement voluntarily and without undue

influence, fear or coercion from any quarter. I plead guilty to the offence

under Section 279 IPC. I fully understand the implications of my plea of guilt.

I further understand that the Court may award sentence for the offence as per

law.

RO & AC (Sugandha Aggarwal)CMM (NW) : Rohini 22.03.2016

FIR No. 891/2014PS Rani Bagh

22.03.2016

Statement of accused Satnam Singh Bakshi, Son of Shri Surjeet Singh Bakshi, R/o WZ1435, Rani Bagh, Delhi.

On SA.I am making this statement voluntarily and without undue


under Section 3 of DPDP Act. I fully understand the implications of my plea of

guilt. I further understand that the Court may award sentence for the offence as

per law.




Accused with counsel Mr. Rajiv Kumar.

Though the matter has been received back from Lok Adalat as

unsettled but today accused has shown his willingness to compromise the

matter with the injured.

Hence injured be summoned for next date.

Put up for compromise, if any, failing which for PE on 02.06.2016.


CC No. TPDDL (4 cases)

22.03.2016

Present : AR of complainant company.

Heard.

Complainant tenders evidence by way of affidavit in pre

summoning evidence.

Heard on the point of summoning. Complaint is within limitation.

Original documents are on record. From the record there are sufficient

grounds to proceed against the accused for offence u/s 138 NI Act.

Accordingly, issue summons to the accused on filing of PF for

13.05.2016. Steps be taken within seven days from today.


CC No.

22.03.2016Statement of Mr. B.K. Jain, AR of complainant company.

On SA.

I am the AR of complainant company. I tender my affidavit Ex.

CW1/A in presummoning evidence which bears my signatures at points A and

B. I also identify documents Ex.CW1/1 to Ex.CW1/11. The contents of my

affidavit are true and correct.

The complainant is maintaining bank account with YES Bank

Netaji Subhash Place Branch which falls under the jurisdiction of PS Subhash

Place.


FIR No.401/2014PS : Ashok Vihar

NOTICE U/S 251 Cr.P.C .

I, Sugandha Aggarwal, C.M.M. NW, Rohini Courts, Delhi, do hereby

serve the following notice upon you Dishant Gera, S/o Harbans Lal Gera, as under :

That on 08.07.2014 at 4.30 pm on the road in front of Kothi No. F4

Phase1, Ashok Vihar, you were driving the I10 Car no. DL8CS1865 in a manner

so rash and negligent as to endanger human life and personal safety of others and thus

you committed an offence punishable U/S 279 IPC, within the jurisdiction of P.S.

Ashok Vihar and within my cognizance.

Secondly, that on the above said date, time and place, while you were

driving the above said vehicle in the said manner, you caused death of Ms. Anuradha

not amounting to culpable homicide and thus committed an offence punishable U/S

304A IPC, within the jurisdiction of P.S. Ashok Vihar and within my cognizance.

Show cause why action be not taken against you for the said offence.

CMM (NW) : Rohini 22.03.2016

The notice is read over and explained to the accused, who is questioned

as under :

Q Do you plead guilty or claim trial?

Ans. I plead not guilty and claim trial.


http://Cr.P.C/



Accused with counsel Mr. Uday Pratap.

Parties heard. Record is perused. A primafacie case for offence u/s

279 & 304A of IPC is made out against the accused. Notice framed separately

to which accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

Put up for PE on 20.09.2016.




Both accused on bail.Mr. Surender Singh, counsel for accused Pradeep.Mr. Ravinder Dabas, counsel for accused Bharat Bhushan.

No PW is present. Summons of PW Sahib Singh received back

with nonavailability report. He be summoned afresh through IO for next date.

PW ASI Sunita Dutta not present despite service. She be

summoned afresh for next date.





Accused is absent.Ms. Pinki, wife of accused.

PW Ct. Ashok is present. No justified ground is furnished for non

appearance of accused. Accused is absent despite repeated calls. It is already

11.30 AM. Hence witness is discharged unexamined.

Issue NBWs against the accused with notice to his surety for

29.08.2016.




Accused with counsel Mr. Mahender Singh.PW Somraj and Ct. Anil are present.

Accused submits that he wants to compromise the matter and seeks

adjournment for moving pleabargaining application. He is at liberty to do so.

Hence witnesses are discharged unexamined.





Accused on bail with counsel Mr. Sanjeev Bisla.

PW Ct. Dharmender and HC Jagpal are present. It is stated by the

MHC (M) that the case property has already been disposed off and he has

brought the sample. However, he has not brought the order by which the case

property has been destroyed in the present matter. Hence witnesses cannot be

examined today. MHC (M) is directed to remain present with the sample of the

case property and the copy of the relevant order on next date.



FIR No. 203/2013PS A Vihar


Accused on bail.Injured with counsel.

Accused seeks adjournment stating that his counsel is not available.

Further he shows his willingness to compromise the matter. Injured submits

that he is ready to compromise the matter after receiving Rs.25,000/ from the

accused. Accused submits that he shall be given one opportunity to consider

the said proposal. Heard. Request is allowed.

Witness is bound down for next date.

Put up for compromise, if any, failing which for PE on 31.5.2016.




Accused with counsel Mr. Rajiv Kumar.

Perusal of record shows that accused has already furnished bail

bonds u/s 437A Cr.PC.

Counsel for accused submits that he shall file written arguments.

Same be filed within five working days from today.

Put up for orders/clarifications, if any, on 07.04.2016 at 3 pm.


FIR No. 59/2013 and 147/2012PS EOW


Accused Girish Dutt Gajja and Avinash produced from JC.Mr. Sandeep Chadhary, counsel for accused Girish Dutt Gajja.Ms. Charu Kalra, counsel for accused Avinash.

Matter is listed today for clarifications regarding the status of FSL

result qua accused Avinash. Today request has been received from the IO

stating that he cannot appear as he is busy in investigation of some other

matter.

Both accused are running in custody and only a report regarding

status of FSL was called. Even if the IO was unable to appear in person the

same could have been sent through some other official. This is no justified

ground for delaying the trial of present case.

However, no adverse order is passed today.

IO is directed to place on record the status of FSL result qua

accused Avinash on next date.

It is stated that bail applications of present accused are listed before

this Court on 04.04.2016.

Hence be listed on 04.04.2016.


FIR No. 284/2012 PS A Vihar22.03.2016Present : Ld. APP for State.

Accused is absent.Superdar Surender Singh with counsel Mr. Ram Niwas.

As per report of Ahlmad, the notice to SHO for death verification report

of accused has been issued but the same has not been received back in the Court.

Neither any report on the same has been received. Matter is lingering on for death

verification report of accused.

In these circumstances, issue show cause notice to Incharge VB of PS

Ashok Vihar as to why appropriate action shall not be taken against him for not

sending the report on time. A copy of this order be also sent to concerned SHO and

reply of Incharge VB shall also be sent to this Court through the concerned SHO.

Another application fro cancelleation of supurdginama in respect of

Vehicle No. HR38G5600. Perusal of record shows that the matter is pending for

death verification report of accused. However, keeping in view the mandate of the

Hon'ble High Court in Manjit Singh Vs. State Crl. M.C. No. 4485/2013 decided on

10.09.2014, the present application is allowed. Supurdginama furnished by Superdar

Surender Singh in respect of Vehicle No. HR38G5600 stands cancelled subject to

the condition that the Superdar shall furnish true colored photographs of the vehicle

including its engine number and chasis number within one week from today.

Put up for death verification report of accused on 21.04.2016.




All accused produced from JC.Mr. Kamal Kishore, LAC for accused Damandeep and Pradeep.LAC for accused Puneet, Mohit and Gautam is not present.

Accused Damandeep and Pradeep submits that they have received

complete copies of chargesheet and documents.

Put up for scrutiny of documents qua accused Puneet, Mohit and

Gautam and arguments on charge on 03.05.2016.

Rehnumai on 5.4.16 & 19.4.16 JR.



22.03.2016

Statement of accused Satnam Singh Bakshi, Son of Shri Surjeet Singh Bakshi, R/o WZ1435, Rani Bagh, Delhi.

On SA.I am making this statement voluntarily and without undue


under Section 3 of DPDP Act. I fully understand the implications of my plea of

guilt. I further understand that the Court may award sentence for the offence as

per law.




Accused in person.

Accused states that he wishes to plead guilty to the offence under

Section 3 of DPDP Act. I have explained consequences of plea of guilt. Yet

accused reiterate his plea of guilt. Statement of accused is recorded separately.

In view of statement of accused, he is convicted for the offence under Section

3 of DPDP Act.

Heard on the quantum of sentence. Convict requests for a lenient

view. He submits that he has family to look after.

I have heard both the parties on the point of sentence.

In the totality of circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that

ends of justice shall be met if lenient view is taken against the accused. For the

offence under Section 3 of DPDP Act, convict is sentenced to pay fine of Rs.

500/ and in default, he shall undergo SI for one day. Fine paid and deposited

in State Treasury vide Receipt No. 451865. File be consigned to record room

after due compliance.


CC No. 393/1

22.03.2016File taken up on an application moved by Karnataka Bank for

extension of time and change of Court Receiver.

Present : None.

In view of submissions made in the application, the applicant bank

is directed to place on record the true copy of the order on the basis of which

the Receiver has refused to take possession on the next date.

Further the Court notice be also sent to Court Receiver for next

date.

Put up for consideration on the application on 07.04.2016 at 12

noon.




Counsel for accused.

Accused not produced from custody. Issue production warrants

against accused, returnable on 02.04.2016.


CC No. 173/1

22.03.2016Present : None.

Heard. The chargesheet in case FIR No. 565/2014 PS Ashok Vihar

has been filed. Hence the proceedings of present complaint case stands clubbed

with the proceedings of the chargesheet. Henceforth the ordersheets of both

the cases shall be recorded in the chargesheet.

The file of the complaint case be tagged alongwith the charge

sheet.




Both accused are present.

PW Ct. Anil is present. However, as both accused are absent

despite repeated calls since morning, witness is discharged unexamined. Issue

NBWs against both accused persons with notice to their sureties for

29.06.2016. PWs be also summoned for next date.


FIR No. 133/96, 448/14 & 575/94PS S Place


Perusal of record shows that inadvertently the summons were

issued to MHC (M) PS Ashok Vihar.

MHC (M) PS Subhash Place be summoned for next date to furnish

the details of the owners of the case property.

Applications be listed on 14.04.2016 at 12 noon.


FIR No. 54/2015PS EOW


Complainant in person.Accused Prakash with counsel Mr. R.S. Yadav.Surety Jagbir Singh is also present.

It is stated by the complainant that he has received a sum of Rs.30

Lakhs and the cheque for the remaining amount of Rs.10 Lakhs is dated

15.04.2016. He further submits that he has no objection if the interim bail of

accused is extended till then. Heard. In view of the submissions made by the

parties, the request is allowed.

At this stage, complainant requests for the date of 22.04.2016

which is not opposed by the other party.

Interim bail of accused Prakash is extended till 22.04.2016. Bail

bonds already on record are also accepted till 22.04.2016.

Be put up on 22.04.2016 at 12 noon.


FIR No. 404/2015 PS Ashok Vihar22.03.2016Present : Ld. APP for State with IO Inspector R.K. Maan.

Accused/applicant with counsel Mr. A.C. Jha.

Vide the present application, the accused has sought defreezing of bank

account No.9140010030212436 with AXIS Bank Branch at 253, Ground Floor,

Deepali Enclave, Pitampura, Delhi.

Today IO has filed a written report which is kept on record. It is stated

by Ld. APP that the prosecution has no objection if the present application is allowed

as it is stated by the IO that the aforesaid account was freezed during investigation

only for the purpose of recovery. Now recovery has already been effected from the

accused persons and in fact accused has paid Rs.6 Lakhs to the complainant.

In view of no objection given by the prosecution and considering the fact

that the purpose for which account was freezed has already been fulfilled, the

application is allowed.

Bank Manager of AXIS Bank Branch at 253, Ground Floor, Deepali

Enclave, Pitampura, Delhi is directed to defreeze bank account No.

9140010030212436 in the name of applicant Praveen Kumar.

It is however made clear that these directions are only with respect to the

present case FIR no. 404/2015 PS Ashok Vihar u/s 420/34 IPC.

A copy of this order be sent to the concerned Bank Manager for

compliance and one copy be given dasti to the applicant/accused.




Accused is absent.Counsel for accused.

PW Ex. ASI Devender is present. An application for exemption of

accused is moved. Heard. For the reasons stated in the application, same is allowed

and accused is exempted from personal appearance only for today.

As accused is not present, witness is discharged unexamined.

Summons of PW Dr. R. Khurdi has been received back with the report

that he has left the hospital. Concerned MS to depute a record clerk, who can identify

signatures of Dr. R. Khurdi.





Accused with counsel Mr. S. Pandit.

No PWs have been summoned for today.

Injured be summoned through IO for next date.





Accused Swastik produced from JC.Accused Anil on bail.

Complainant is not present. Complainant be summoned for next

date to explore the possibility of compromise.

Put up for compromise, failing which for arguments on charge on

19.04.2016. Rehnumai on 5.4.16 JR.




Accused Swastik produced from JC.Accused Anil on bail.

Complainant is not present. Complainant be summoned for next

date to explore the possibility of compromise.

Put up for compromise, failing which for scrutiny of documents

and arguments on charge on 19.04.2016. Rehnumai on 5.4.16 JR.




Accused with counsel Mr. Anand Kumar.

Counsel seeks adjournment for scrutiny of documents. Heard.

Request is allowed.

Put up for S/D and arguments on charge on 12.08.2016.




Complainant, Victim and the IO be summoned for 09.08.2016.




Accused with counsel.

Accused has moved an application for pleabargaining. Hence let

the file be placed before Ld. Link MM on 29.03.2016 at 2 pm where accused is

directed to appear.

Ahlmad to send the case file accordingly.




Accused is absent.

No process is issued by the Ahlmad. Today also accused is not

present. Let accused be summoned through concerned IO for next date.

Put up for appearance of accused on 19.07.2016.




All three accused are present.Mr. Kashmir Singh, counsel for accused Vikas.Mr. Sanjay Kumar, counsel for remaining two accused.

It is stated that the IO was called to state whether the recovered

parts of motorcycle from accused Vikas were in any manner connected with

the stolen motorcycle.

For the said clarifications, IO be summoned to remain present in

the Court.

Put up for arguments on charge on 04.07.2016.




Accused with counsel Mr. Uday Pratap.

An application for cancellation of NBWs filed by accused is

pending for consideration. Heard. For the reasons stated in the application,

same is allowed and NBWs are cancelled subject to fine of Rs.500/. Fine paid

and deposited in State Treasury vide Receipt No. 451864.

Counsel seeks adjournment for scrutiny of documents and

arguments on charge. Heard. Request is allowed.

Put up for S/D and arguments on charge on 04.06.2016.




Accused with counsel Ms. Meena Goswami.

Counsel submits that the accused has received complete copies of

chargesheet and documents.

Put up for consideration on charge on 28.06.2016.




Process server who executed process u/s 82 Cr.PC against the

accused be summoned for 01.06.2016.


CC No. 2/1

22.03.2016Present : None for complainant.

As per report of Ahlmad, the connected case i.e. untraced report in

case FIR No. 97/2012 PS Ashok Vihar is listed for 23.7.2016.

Hence the present case be also listed with connected case on

23.7.2016.




Accused on bail.

During consideration on notice, IO was called by my Ld.

Predecessor. However, arguments on the point of framing of notice have to be

heard afresh.

Hence put up for consideration on notice on 30.7.2016.




Both accused with counsel Mr. Inderjeet Barnala.

Matter is at the stage of PE. During PE, IO was called for certain

clarifications with regard to the MLC of injured by my Ld. Predecessor.

However, this is an old matter and I do not deem it fit to linger on the matter

for clarifications from the IO.

As the matter is at the stage of PE, let all the Doctors arrayed as

witnesses be summoned for next date and clarifications can be taken from the

doctors at the time of their examination.

Put up for PE on 03.06.2016 at 2 PM.




Accused is absent.Mr. Anand Sharma, counsel for accused.

No PWs have been summoned for today.

An application for exemption of accused is moved. Heard. For the

reasons stated in the application, same is allowed and accused is exempted

from personal appearance only for today.

PWs be summoned for next date.

Put up for entire PE on 17.05.2016.



22.03.2016Present: Ld. APP for State.

Accused on bail with counsel.Injured Madan Lal in person.

With the judicial intervention of the Court, the present matter has

been settled between the parties for a total compensation of Rs.22,000/ which

has been paid by the accused to the injured today in cash.

Statement of Injured is recorded separately in this regard wherein

permission has been sought by injured to compound the offence under Section

338 of Indian Penal Code. In view of statement of injured, the offence under

Section 338 of Indian Penal Code alleged against the accused is compounded.

Accused states that he wishes to plead guilty to the offence under

Section 279 Indian Penal Code. I have explained consequences of plea of guilt.

Yet accused reiterate his plea of guilt. Statement of accused is recorded

separately. In view of statement of accused, he is convicted for the offence

under Section 279 of Indian Penal Code.

Heard on the quantum of sentence. Convict requests for a lenient

view. He submits that he has family to look after.

I have heard both the parties on the point of sentence.

Contd...2/

2 FIR No. 489/2009

In the totality of circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that

ends of justice shall be met if lenient view is taken against the accused. For the

offence under Section 279 of Indian Penal Code, convict is sentenced to pay

fine of Rs.100/ and in default, he shall undergo SI for one day. Fine paid and

deposited in State Treasury vide Receipt No. 451863.

Bail bonds are cancelled and surety is discharged. Original

documents of accused be released to him against acknowledgment. Original

documents of surety, if any, be returned to him after cancellation of

endorsement. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.

(Sugandha Aggarwal) Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (North West)

Rohini Courts : Delhi. Announced in open Court on this 22nd Day of March, 2016.



Accused Rizwan with LAC Mr. Kamal Kishore.Accused Chander Verma is absent.Mr. Aman Saroha, counsel for Accused Chander Verma.

An application for exemption of Accused Chander Verma is moved.

Heard. For the reasons stated in the application, same is allowed and Accused

Chander Verma is exempted from personal appearance only for today.

It is stated that complete copies have been received by accused Rizwan.

Counsel for Accused Chander Verma also submit that complete copies have been

received by Accused Chander Verma.

Section 207 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been complied

with. The accused persons have been chargesheeted for the offences under Section

376 IPC amongst other offences. The case is exclusively triable by the Court of

Sessions. It is hereby committed to the Court of Sessions for trial in accordance with

law. Both accused persons are directed to appear before the Court of Ld. District &

Sessions Judge, District North West, Rohini Delhi on 02.04.2016 at 2 PM.

Ahlmad is directed to send the entire record to the Court of Ld. District

& Sessions Judge, District North West, Rohini well within time. Ld. Public

Prosecutor be notified of the committal of the case.


CC No.

22.03.2016Statement of Mr. Naresh Arora, S/o Sh. R.L. Arora, AR of complainant company.

On SA.

I am the AR of complainant company. I tender my affidavit Ex.

CW1/A in presummoning evidence which bears my signatures at points A and

B. I also identify documents Ex.CW1/1 to Ex.CW1/5. The contents of my

affidavit are true and correct.


CC No. SBI Cards & Payments Services Pvt. Ltd. (6 cases)

22.03.2016Fresh complaint u/s 138 NI Act filed and marked to self. It be

checked and registered.

Present : AR of complainant company with counsel.

Heard.

Complainant tenders evidence by way of affidavit in pre

summoning evidence.

Heard on the point of summoning. Complaint is within limitation.

Original documents are on record. From the record there are sufficient

grounds to proceed against the accused for offence u/s 138 NI Act.

Accordingly, issue summons to the accused on filing of PF for

20.05.2016. Steps be taken within seven days from today.




Both convicts with counsels Mr. Vijay Kumar and Ms.Nidhi Kalia

Arguments are heard on the point of sentence.

Ld. APP submits that both the convicts have committed the offence

of snatching and theft and as such they should be sentenced to maximum

imprisonment.

Per contra, it is argued by counsels for convicts that convict Hari

Kishan has already undergone remained in custody for long period of 5

months. For convict Suresh it is stated that he has also undergone remained in

custody for long period.

I have considered the rival contentions of both the parties and have

perused the record.

In the present matter, both the convicts have snatched a sum of Rs.

10,300/ from the complainant. Hence ends of justice shall be met if the

complainant is adequately compensated but considering the period of custody,

in my considered opinion, lenient view is warranted.

For the offence u/s 356 of IPC, both the convicts are sentenced to

undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month.

Contd..2/

2 FIR No. 329/1999

For the offence u/s 379 of IPC, both the convicts are sentenced to

undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month and both the convicts

are also directed to deposit compensation of Rs.10,000/ each. In default of

deposit of compensation amount, both the convicts shall undergo SI for five

days. Compensation amount of Rs.10,000/ each paid by both the convicts and

deposited in State Treasury vide Receipt No. 451867 and 451868.

Both the sentences shall run concurrently.

Benefit of Section 428 Cr.PC is given to both the convicts.

As both the convicts have already undergone custody for one

month, both of them are set at liberty.

The complainant be summoned through concerned SHO for next

date for the purpose of release of the compensation amount.

Be listed on 18.04.2016.



22.03.2016This is an application for one day PC remand of accused Rajeev

and Shankar.

Present : Ld. APP for State with SI Prem Pal.Accused Rajeev and Shankar produced from JC.Mr. Sumit Garg, Remand Advocate of this Court.

Heard. It is stated that one day PC remand is required for recovery

of case property. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed.

Both the accused persons are remanded to PC for one day and be produced on

23.3.2016. Medical examination shall be conducted before and after PC

remand. Dasti allowed, as prayed for.




and Shankar.








22.03.2016Present : None.

Report from the CA Branch and the Ahlmad of the Court of

Sh.Viplav Dabas, Ld. MM has been received. Same are perused. After

considering both the reports, no action is required at the end of Office of the

undersigned.

If the grievances of the applicant are still not addressed, he is at

liberty to move appropriate application before the appropriate forum.


FIR No. 5/2016PS Crime Branch


Accused produced from JC/Meerut Jail.Mr. Arun Saroha, counsel for accused.

Counsel submits that the accused has received complete copies of

chargesheet and documents.

Parties heard. Record is perused. A primafacie case for offence u/s

25/27 of Arms Act is made out against the accused. Charge framed separately

to which accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

Put up for PE on 05.04.2016 at 2.30 PM.



22.03.2016Present : Ld. APP for State with IO SI Prem Pal.

Accused Bunty and Ajay with counsel Mr. Bharat Singh.

Counsel has filed his vakalatnama. Same is kept on record.

IO submits that both the accused persons are already granted bail

by the JJB. He further states that Final Report is to be filed and investigation is

pending.

Appearance of both accused persons is recorded before this Court.

Final Report be filed by the IO in due course as per law.




Report from Jail Superintendent received. In view of the report, no

further action is required.


CC No. Iqbal Hussain Ansari Vs. Vijay Singh

22.03.2016Fresh complaint case filed and marked to self. It be checked and

registered. Present : Complainant with counsel.

Heard. Record is perused.

The complaint is accompanied with an application u/s 156 (3)

Cr.PC. Hence let, status report be called from the concerned PS as to whether

any FIR has been registered on the complaint of the complainant and if so,

what is the status of investigation.

Put up for consideration on the application u/s 156(3) Cr.PC on

18.04.2016.



22.03.2016Present : Ld. APP for State with IO Inspector Samar Singh.

Complainant with counsel Mr. Biju Shanker.

It is stated that the report from Medical Council of India (MCI) has

not been received till date. Reminder was also sent on 10.3.2016.

Perusal of record shows that initially, the postmortem report stated

the reason of death as “shock due to hemorrhage as a result of extensive

collection of blood in retroperitoneal space produced by injection puncture

injury to right femoral artery.”

Subsequent to that the matter was sent to Delhi Medical Council

(DMC) where the Doctors have opined that there was no negligence on the part

of the Doctors at Sunder Lal Jain Hospital, Ashok Vihar and the treatment was

given as per the medical standards.

Subsequently a report was given by the Post Mortem Board that as

per the cause of death, the treatment given was as per the approved medical

standards. Hence a specific report be taken from the MCI regarding the initial

cause of death as mentioned in the postmortem report.

It was stated in the postmortem report that there was extensive

collection of blood in retroperitoneal space produced by injection puncture

injury. How the injection puncture injury can be in consonance with the

approved medical standards is to be reported by the MCI. Contd..2/

2

Further it is stated in the testimony of CW2 regarding the insertion

of catheter and that subsequently a small lump was noticed at the side of earlier

prick at right femoral artery.

Copy of statement of CW2 shall be handed over to IO who shall

place the same before MCI for seeking an opinion whether in those

circumstances, any negligence can be attributed to the treating doctor or not.

It is further stated in all the medical reports that the deceased has

developed septic due to which his lungs and kidneys have stopped functioning.

As per the medical documents, no septic was detected till the night of

21.08.2007. Whether the septic can be suddenly detected and can be developed

without any negligence on the part of treating doctor in the ailment from which

deceased was suffering to such an extent that it becomes fatal overnight shall

also be reported by the MCI.

Besides this a report on all the treatment received by the deceased

in the hospital shall also be given by the MCI.

A copy of this order be given dasti to the IO with directions to

expedite the report from MCI.

Be listed for consideration on 21.04.2016.


fir no. 351/2011 summons to accused ravi and...

Documents