VIKRAMJEET BALHARA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of the order dtd. 27/11/2019 passed by the learned ASJ-02, (South), Saket Court, Delhi, dismissing the criminal revision petition No. 221/2019, filed by the petitioner against the common order dtd. 3/5/2019 passed by the learned MM-03(South), dismissing the application filed by the petitioner/accused under Sec. 91 Cr.P.C. and allowing the application under Sec. 302 Cr.P.C. moved by the complainant. The matter relates to FIR No.52/2016 registered under Ss. 420/448/468/471/34 IPC at PS Neb Sarai.

(2.) The petitioner is an accused in the said FIR which is pending before the learned MM. The allegations against him are that he, along with the co- accused had forged documents being a Relinquishment Deed and a GPA in respect of property bearing No. E-29, Neb Valley, Sainik Farms, Delhi and on the basis of such documents had sought variation in the entries in the revenue records and had also cheated the complainant in order to grab her property. The chargesheet has been filed. At the time of hearing on charge, the petitioner filed an application under Sec. 91 Cr.P.C seeking directions to the Investigating Officer (I.O.) to produce replies dtd. 19/4/2016 and 19/7/2016 along with supporting documents which had been filed by the petitioner before the I.O. Further directions were sought to take these replies and supportive documents on the record and make it part of the challan/chargesheet filed by the I.O.

(3.) Ms. Anu Narula, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the I.O. has mala fidely withheld those documents from the court as they had not been filed along with the chargesheet. It is submitted that the learned MM in its order dtd. 3/5/2019, very perfunctorily observed that the documents were not of sterling quality and the non-production of which would have a crucial bearing on the issue of framing of charge. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, referring to the application, it was urged that the documents sought to be brought on record were indeed of sterling quality as reflected from the contents of the replies dtd. 19/4/2016 and 19/7/2016, namely, proceedings in the civil suits including appeal, contempt notice etc. as also documents such as the Relinquishment Deed, revenue records, court orders, etc., i.e. a set of 10 documents.