BHARTI AIRTEL LTD. Vs. RANA DHARMINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER is aggrieved from the order dated 18. 6. 2007, passed by District Forum Kullu, in Complaint No. 43/2006 directing the Superintendent of Police, Kullu to register FIR against it under Sections 467, 466, 420 and 471 IPC at the instance of respondent No. 1 on his application that was before the Forum.

(2.) FACTS giving rise to this revision are that a complaint was filed by respondent No. 1 against respondent No. 2 alleging over -billing qua his telephone No. 230207 installed at his village Hawai, PO Seobagh, Tehsil and District Kullu. His grievance was that during the period 14. 5. 2006 to 28. 5. 2006 said telephone was out of order, whereas he received a telephone bill of Rs. 3602/ - for the period 1. 4. 2006 to 31. 5. 2006. Further according to him his average telephone bill used to be Rs. 500/ - or so for two months.

(3.) SHYAM Lal Sood newly added respondent appearing on 27. 4. 2007 and informed that the telephone in question was with his girlfriend Ms. Ganga resident of area Palach. He further stated that he was arrested by the police under Section 376 IPC on the complaint of Ms. Ganga Devi during the period to which this complaint relates. In this background, FIR has been ordered to be registered. We are sorry to observe that the District Forum below has pre -judged the entire issue on the statement of Shyam Lal Sood respondent No. 3 before us, by accepting his ipse dixit.