ROMI MALHOTRA Vs. STATE OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner seeks a quashing order in respect of criminal proceedings initiated pursuant to FIR No. 269/95, which had alleged commission of offences under Section 323/325/34 IPC.

(2.) The brief facts are that the petitioner along with two other accused was alleged to have been instrumental in the beating up of one Gurdip Singh, the complainant. It is an undisputed fact that the petitioner and Gurdip Singh are close relatives; the first petitioner is the nephew of Gurdip Singh and petitioner Nos. 2 and 3, his sisters. Apparently, during the course of proceedings other co-accused and the complainant, namely, the mother and the driver who is alleged to have been party to the assault upon the complainant, moved an application for compounding; that was granted. The Court on 22.03.00 after considering the materials on record, formed an opinion that charges could framed under Section 323/34 IPC in respect of the petitioners. The Public Prosecutor appears to have subsequently moved an application on 26.10.02 averring that the MLC indicated grievous hurt. That application as well as another application for dropping of the charges so far as the present petitioner were concerned, was moved.

(3.) The trial Court, by its order dated 28.07.03 allowed the application of the prosecution, for invoking the power under Section 216 Cr.P.C.. In course of its order, the Court observed that the Medico Legal Certificate (M.L.C.) which had apparently been overlooked when the charges were framed earlier, had indicated that the injured Gurdip Singh had suffered fracture on his eighth rib. The application of the petitioners was rejected on the ground that dropping of proceedings was not warranted since a cognizable offence was made out. The petitioner carried the order in revision.