CC no. 117/S/15 Present: None. (Ashish Aggarwal) Chief...

CC no. 117/S/15

15.12.2015Present: None.

Nobody has appeared on behalf of the applicant. Arguments are to

be addressed on the maintainability of caveat. Last opportunity is granted to the

applicant and his counsel to appear.

List on 22.02.2016.

(Ashish Aggarwal) Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (North)

Delhi 15.12.2015

CC no. 473/1

15.12.2015Present: Counsel for complainant.

Counsel for complainant prays for adjournment for recording of

evidence. He submits that the complainant is not available today. In the interest

of justice, last and final opportunity is granted to the complainant.

Renotify on 19.01.2016. The said date is fixed at the specific

request of counsel for complainant.


Delhi 15.12.2015

CC no. 650/1

15.12.2015Present: Counsel for complainant with complainant.

Heard arguments. Previous status report is perused. As per previous

status report, submitted by SI Ravinder PS Alipur FIR no.1102/14 has been

registered at PS Alipur. Investigation was reported to be pending. Let a fresh

status report be called for. Notice be issued to the IO for this purpose returnable

on the next date of hearing.

SI Dinesh from PS Swaroop Nagar is present. He submits that there

is no investigation pending at PS Swaroop Nagar. He is discharged.

List on 16.02.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015

FIR no. 204/08PS S. P. Badli

15.12.2015Present: None for State.

Accused Joginder Singh and Dalbir Singh are absent.

Accused Charanjeet Singh has already been convicted and

sentenced.

Accused Joginder Singh and Dalbir Singh have not appeared

despite repeated calls. In the interest of justice, they are granted one more

opportunity to put in appearance.

List for further proceedings on 16.03.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015



Accused Dheeraj @ Pankaj with counsel.

Accused submits that on reconsidering his plea, he has decided not

to plead guilty. He submits that the matter may be proceeded with for trial. At

request, the case is adjourned to 12.02.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015

FIR no. 91/13PS Alipur


Neither APP nor accused have appeared. The surety of the accused

has also not appeared. Keeping in view the previous record of absence, it is

directed that nonbailable warrants be issued against the accused.

List on 03.03.2016. (Ashish Aggarwal)

Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (North) Delhi

15.12.2015



Accused has not appeared despite repeated calls. In the interest of

justice, he is granted one more opportunity to put in appearance.

List for appearance of accused and for further proceedings on

21.03.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015



There is no report regarding status of further investigation. Let

notice be issued to the IO to file report on the next date of hearing.

List on 16.03.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015



Accused persons are absent.Counsel for accused persons.

Counsel for accused persons verbally prays for exemption from

personal appearance on behalf of accused Brijesh Sharma and Sanjay Shekhari.

Heard arguments. The request is allowed. The said accused persons are exempted

from their personal appearance for today only.

Put up for appearance of accused persons and for further

proceedings on 11.02.2016.

Let notice be also issued to the IO for his appearance before this

court on the next date of hearing for clarifications. IO shall explain as to why all

directors of the company which is registered owner of the vehicle, have not been

arrayed as accused persons for offence under Section 180 of Motor Vehicles Act,

in terms of Section 199 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.


Delhi 15.12.2015


15.12.2015Present: Ld. Substitute APP for State.

Accused persons Sukhdev and Binder with counsel.Accused Baldev Singh is absent.

Counsel for accused persons verbally prays for exemption from

personal appearance on behalf of accused Baldev Singh. Arguments are heard.

The request is allowed. The said accused is exempted from his personal

appearance for today only.

List for appearance of accused Baldev Singh and for further

proceedings on 16.03.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015



None for accused persons.

Accused persons have not appeared despite repeated calls.

Considering that they have appeared on the last date of hearing, they are granted

one more opportunity to put in appearance.

List on 25.02.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015



Accused Shakil in person.

The matter is listed for PE. No PW is present today.

Put up for PE on 21.01.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015



Accused in person.




Delhi 15.12.2015



Both accused in person with counsel.




Delhi 15.12.2015



Accused in person.

Let copy of police report and accompanying documents be supplied

to the accused.

Put up for scrutiny of documents and for further proceedings on

28.01.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015


15.12.2015Ld. Presiding Officer is busy in dealing with transfer files under

Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.

Present: Ld. Substitute APP for State.Accused Bijender Singh in person.

Report in terms of previous order has not been received. Let fresh

court notice be issued in terms of previous order returnable on 12.01.2016.

(Harjeet Singh Jaspal) Reliever Metropolitan Magistrate

Delhi 15.12.2015




Present: Ld. Substitute APP for State with HC Sridhar.Ms. Suman and Mr. Naveen wife and son of complainant are present.

Ms. Suman and Mr. Naveen wife and son of complainant submit

that they are competent to make statement on behalf of the complainant. Ms.

Suman and Mr. Naveen wife and son of complainant submit that they have no

objection if the untraced report is accepted. Joint statement of Ms. Suman and

Mr. Naveen wife and son of complainant is recorded separately in this regard.

Elaborate investigation has been carried out by the police. Despite

efforts of the police, stolen car has not been recovered and offender could not be

traced. Untraced report is accepted in view of the joint statement of Ms. Suman

and Mr. Naveen wife and son of complainant recorded today. File be sent back

to concerned police station with copy of this order and be preserved to be re

opened as and when any clue is found. Copy thereof shall be retained in the

Court with the original ordersheet and shall be consigned to record room after

due compliance.


Delhi 15.12.2015




Present: Ld. Substitute APP for State.Accused Amit and Gaurav in person.

Accused persons submit that they intend to plead guilty for the

offence under Section 33 of Delhi Excise Act. Meaning and consequences of

plead guilty have been explained to the accused persons. They are given some

more time to think over the same. The case shall be taken up again at 12:00 noon.


Delhi 15.12.2015

File taken up again at 12:00 noon.

Present: Ld. Substitute APP for State.Accused Amit and Gaurav in person.

Accused persons have pleaded guilty to the offence punishable

under Section 33 of Delhi Excise Act. Accused persons are informed about the

consequences of pleading guilty. They however reiterate their plea of guilt. Their

joint statement is recorded separately. In view of the voluntary plea of guilt by

accused persons, they are convicted for offence punishable under Section 33 of

Delhi Excise Act.

Arguments on the point of sentence are heard. Having regard to the

fact that accused persons have voluntarily admitted their mistake and have not

tried to put up a false defence, a lenient view is warranted. For offence under

Section 33 of Delhi Excise Act, convicts are sentenced to imprisonment till rising

of the court (in the custody of naib court Ct. Ravi Kant and be produced before

the Ld. CMM at 04:00 pm) and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/ each. In default of

payment of fine, the convicts shall undergo simple imprisonment for ten days.

Fine is paid. Bail bonds of convicts are cancelled. Their sureties are discharged.

Original documents, if any, be returned to the rightful claimant against

acknowledgment. Endorsement, if any, be also cancelled. The case is disposed

off. File be consigned to record room.


Delhi 15.12.2015




Present: Ld. Substitute APP for State.

IO is not present. Complainant is also not present despite service.

Let fresh court notice be issued to the IO and complainant for their appearance

before this court on the next date of hearing. Last opportunity is granted to the

complainant to put in appearance.

List on 23.02.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015





IO is not present. Complainant is also not present despite service.

Let fresh court notice be issued to the IO and complainant for their appearance

before this court on the next date of hearing. Last opportunity is granted to the

complainant to put in appearance.

List on 23.02.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015





IO is not present despite service. Complainant is also not present

despite service. Let fresh court notice be issued to the IO and complainant for

their appearance before this court on the next date of hearing. Last opportunity is

granted to the complainant to put in appearance.

List on 23.02.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015





IO is present. IO submits that he communicated with the

complainant over the phone and that the complainant shall appear before the

court on the next date of hearing. Upon submissions of the IO one more

opportunity is granted to the complainant to put in appearance. Let fresh court

notice be issued to the complainant to be served through IO HC Subhash Chand.

List on 23.02.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015





IO ASI Kulbir is not present. Let fresh court notice be issued to the

IO for his appearance before this court on the next date of hearing.

List on 08.02.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015





IO ASI Pradeep Kumar is not present despite service. He is granted

one more opportunity to put in appearance. Oral intimation in this regard is also

given to naib court Ct. Ravi Kant.

List on 08.02.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015

CC no. 476/1



Present: Ld. Substitute APP for State.Complainant Ms. Geeta with counsel Mr. Ram Kumar.

Counsel for complainant submits that he shall file his vakalatnama

during the course of the day. Counsel for complainant submits that the

complainant is not satisfied with the untraced report.

Counsel for complainant submits that he needs some time to file the

protest petition. At request, time is allowed.

Put up for further proceedings on 01.02.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015





IO is not present despite service. Complainant is also not present

despite service. Let fresh court notice be issued to the IO and complainant for

their appearance before this court on the next date of hearing. Last opportunity is

granted to the complainant to put in appearance.

List on 23.02.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015




Present: Ld. Substitute APP for State.Complainant in person.

A report has been received under the signatures of HC Devender.

The said report is duly forwarded by SHO PS Alipur. Let notice be issued to the

IO for his appearance before this court on the next date of hearing.

List on 08.01.2015.


Delhi 15.12.2015


15.12.2015Ld. Presiding Officer is busy in dealing with transfer files under Section

138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.

Present: Ld. Substitute APP for State.IO HC Jagat from PS S. P. Badli.

The IO concerned submits that he has not placed on record the

photographs of the alleged defacement as he took the photographs from his cell phone

and the said cell phone has got misplaced and is since untraceable. The IO further

submits that the defacement in the present case was in form of a hoarding which was

tied up/suspended between two poles. Submissions of IO are heard. Record is perused.

Perusal of the chargesheet also reveals that defacement was in the form of a hoarding.

The IO and the police report allege commission of offence under Section 3 of Delhi

Prevention of Defacement of Property Act, 2007. As per allegations, the accused had

affixed a board in between two electricity poles.

Section 3 of the said Act punishes defacement of property by “writing or

marking”. The placing of a board between two electricity poles does not amount to

defacement by writing or marking as held by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of

T. S. Marwah Vs. State 2008 (4) JCC 2561. Although the said decision was rendered in

the context of Section 3 of the West Bengal Prevention of Defacement of Property Act,

1976, the decision equally applies to the present case since the provisions of Section 3

of the West Bengal Prevention of Defacement of Property Act, 1976 are analogous to

that of Section 3 of Delhi Prevention of Defacement of Property Act, 2007. Hence,

Section 3 of Delhi Prevention of Defacement of Property Act, 2007 is not attracted to

the facts of the present case. Cognizance is declined. Proceedings are dropped. The

police report is rejected. Bail bonds of the accused are cancelled. His surety is

discharged. File be consigned to record room.


Delhi 15.12.2015




Present: Ld. Substitute APP for State.Complainant Mr.Bhavesh Chaudhary in person.

Complainant submits that he has no objection if the untraced report

is accepted. Statement of complainant is recorded separately in this regard.

Elaborate investigation has been carried out by the police. Despite

efforts of the police, stolen 64 sacks of supari not been recovered and offender

could not be traced. Untraced report is accepted in view of the statement of

complainant recorded today. File be sent back to concerned police station with

copy of this order and be preserved to be reopened as and when any clue is

found. Copy thereof shall be retained in the Court with the original ordersheet

and shall be consigned to record room after due compliance.


Delhi 15.12.2015

FIR no. 799/14PS Mahendra Park



Present: Ld. Substitute APP for State.Accused Shri Niwas with counsel.

Accused has voluntarily pleaded guilty to the offence punishable

under Section 3 of Delhi Prevention of Defacement of Property Act, 2007.

Accused is informed about the consequences of pleading guilty. He reiterates his

plea of guilt. His statement is recorded separately. In view of the voluntary plea

of guilt by accused, he is convicted of offence punishable under Section 3 of

Delhi Prevention of Defacement of Property Act, 2007.

Arguments on the point of sentence are heard. Having regard to the

fact that accused has voluntarily admitted his mistake and has not tried to put up

a false defence, a lenient view is warranted. Regard is also had to the antecedents,

age and character of the offender, which preeminently show that there is a high

possibility of reformation. For offence under Section 3 of Delhi Prevention of

Defacement of Property Act, 2007, convict is sentenced to imprisonment till

rising of the court and to pay fine of Rs.500/. In default of payment of fine, the

convict shall undergo simple imprisonment for five days. Fine is paid. Bail bonds

of convict are cancelled. His surety is discharged. Original documents, if any, be

returned to the rightful claimant against acknowledgment. Endorsement, if any,

be also cancelled. The case is disposed off. File be consigned to record room.


Delhi/15.12.2015




File taken up today on an application for cancellation of bailable

warrants on behalf of accused Neeraj @ Monu.

Present: Ld. Substitute APP for State.Accused in person with counsel.

Arguments on the application are heard. For the reasons stated in

the application, the same is allowed. Bailable warrants directed to be issued

against accused Neeraj @ Monu are hereby cancelled subject to payment of costs

of Rs.700/. Costs paid. Accused is warned to be careful in attending the court

proceedings in future.

Put up on date fixed i.e. 19.01.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015



Accused in person with counsel Mr. Sumit Gupta.

The matter is listed for PE. PW2 Shyam Lal is present. His

testimony is recorded. He is discharged.

Put up for remaining PE on 18.03.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015




Present: Ld. Substitute APP for State.Accused Jai Praksh in person.

PW/superdar Prahlad Singh is present. The matter is listed for PE.

Superdar submits that he has not brought the vehicle and he shall bring the

offending vehicle on the next date of hearing. Keeping in mind the vehicle is not

produced, the case is adjourned for PE to 12.05.2016. Superdar is directed to

produce the vehicle on the next date of hearing.


Delhi 15.12.2015

FIR No. 227/12PS Alipur (DIU)



File taken up today pursuant to the directions/conditions imposed in

order dated 27.07.2015.

Present: Ld. Substitute APP for State.Accused Shiksha Sharma and Ramesh Sharma with legal aid counsel Mr. Suresh Bhardwaj.

As directed by the order dated 27.07.2015, the aforementioned

accused persons are present before the court. Their presence is recorded. They

are discharged for today only.


(Harjeet Singh Jaspal) Reliever Metropolitan Magistrate (North)

Delhi 15.12.2015



Accused in person.

The matter is listed for PE. PW4 HC Rajesh Kumar is present. His

testimony is recorded. He is discharged.

Put up for remaining PE on 17.03.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015

CC no.595/1

15.12.2015Present: Authorized representative of complainant.

Accused in person.

The offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act is

compoundable. Parties submit that they wish to explore the possibility of

settlement before the Lok Adalat.

As per directions of DLSA, North, Delhi, there shall be a

continuous Lok Adalat held on each day and cases may be referred for the said

daily Lok Adalat. This is a fit case to refer to the daily continuous Lok Adalat.

The procedure devised by DLSA for referring the matter to Lok

Adalat is that file has to be sent to the Ld. Secretary, District Legal Services

Authority for further directions who may assign it to the Daily Continuous Lok

Adalat. In view thereof, it is directed that file be placed before Mr. Naveen

Kumar Kashyap, Ld. Secretary, North District Legal Services Authority

immediately for referring the same to Daily Continuous Lok Adalat scheduled for

today. Ahlmad shall send the file immediately. Referral order is prepared

separately as per format prescribed by DLSA.


Delhi 15.12.2015

CC no. 595/1

15.12.2015The case is taken up in Daily Continuous Lok Adalat.

Present: Authorized representative of complainant.Accused in person.

A settlement is arrived at between the complainant and the accused.

Authorized representative of complainant submits that he wishes to compound

the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. His statement is

recorded separately. In view of his statement, the said offence is compounded.

The case is disposed off as settled. Let file be consigned to record room.

(Ashish Aggarwal) Associate Member Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (North)/ DCLA Presiding Officer DCLA 15.12.2015 Delhi

15.12.2015




Present: Ld. Substitute APP for State.Accused Shiv Shankar is absent.

The matter is listed for PE. PW Mr. Ashok Kumar is present.

Accused has not appeared despite repeated calls. Issue bailable

warrants in the sum of Rs.5,000/ against him.

List on 08.02.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015




File taken up today on an application for cancellation of superdari

and permission to sell the vehicle bearing registration no.HR51AE0198 filed on

behalf of applicant/superdar Rajesh Kumar.

Present: Ld. APP for State.Applicant in person with counsel.

Heard arguments in respect of the application. It is stated in the

application that the aforesaid vehicle was released on superdari to the applicant.

It is further stated in the application that the applicant has already been examined

and discharged and the vehicle has already been exhibited. Besides, the

photographs of the vehicle already on record, the aforementioned applicant has

tendered fresh photographs. In these circumstances, the application is allowed.

Superdari of the vehicle bearing no. HR51AE0198 is cancelled. Superdar is

permitted to sell the said vehicle.


Copy of this order be given dasti, as prayed for.


Delhi 15.12.2015




File taken up today on an application for cancellation of superdari

and permission to sell the vehicle bearing registration no.HR38M4055 filed on

behalf of applicant/superdar Arun Kumar Bansal.

Present: Ld. APP for State.Applicant in person with counsel.

Heard arguments in respect of the application. It is stated in the

application that the aforesaid vehicle was released on superdari to the applicant.

It is further stated in the application that the applicant has already been examined

and discharged and the vehicle has already been exhibited. Besides, the

photographs of the vehicle already on record, the aforementioned applicant has

tendered fresh photographs. In these circumstances, the application is allowed.

Superdari of the vehicle bearing no. HR38M4055 is cancelled. Superdar is

permitted to sell the said vehicle.


Copy of this order be given dasti, as prayed for.


Delhi 15.12.2015




Fresh police report is received from filing section. It be checked

and registered.

Present: Ld. APP for State.

The police report and accompanying documents are perused. From

the material available on record cognizance of offences under Sections 279 and

304A of IPC is taken. There is sufficient ground for proceeding against the

accused.

Issue summons to the accused mentioned under column no.11 of

the chargesheet to be served through IO returnable on 19.01.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015





and registered.



the material available on record cognizance of offences under Sections 279, 337,

338 and 304A of IPC is taken. There is sufficient ground for proceeding against

the accused.




Delhi 15.12.2015





and registered.



the material available on record cognizance of offence under Section 3 of Delhi

Prevention of Defacement of Property Act, 2007 is taken. There is sufficient

ground for proceeding against the accused.




Delhi 15.12.2015




Present: Ld. Substitute APP for State.Accused Ramesh Chand is absent.

On the last date of hearing, production warrants were directed to be

issued against accused Ramesh Chand. The said warrants received back with the

report that the accused is not present in Tihar Jail. Issue nonbailable warrants

against the accused to be executed through IO concerned.

List on 11.03.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015


15.12.2015This is an application for remand of accused Hemant and Baldev in

judicial custody for a period of fourteen days.

Present: Ld. APP for the State. Accused Hemant and Baldev produced from judicial custody. IO SI Dhirendra Singh.

An application has been moved for extension of judicial custody for

fourteen days of the aforementioned accused persons. It is stated therein that

investigation is still pending, the continued custody is submitted to be imperative

for the investigation and for securing the presence of the accused persons before

the court.

Arguments are heard. Record is perused. Sufficiency of ground for

continued detention is examined.

Submissions made by the IO are found to be meritorious, in view

thereof, the judicial custody of the aforementioned accused persons is extended

by fourteen days. They be produced before the court of Ld. Duty MM on

29.12.2015.


Delhi 15.12.2015

FIR no. 82/14PS Crime Branch

15.12.2015Present: Ld. APP for the State. SI Raghu Kumar from PS S. P. Badli IO in case FIR no.793/14 PS

S. P. Badli.

In the last order this court directed the IO of FIR no.82/14 PS

Crime Branch to appear before the court. The said IO is not present. It appears

that even the process has not been issued in terms of previous order. Ahlmad is

reprimanded and is directed to be careful in future. Let fresh process be issued in

terms of previous order returnable on 06.01.2016. Oral intimation in this regard

is also given to naib court concerned Ct. Mahavir.


Delhi 15.12.2015


15.12.2015This is an application for permission to interrogate and arrest

accused Lokesh S/o Satish in judicial custody.

Present: Ld. APP for State with IO HC Naresh Kumar alongwith SI Dhirendra Singh.

Heard arguments in respect of the said application. Applicant HC

Naresh Kumar submits that interrogation shall be carried out by SI Dhirendra

Singh and that he may be permitted to do so.

The accused person is stated to be in judicial custody in separate

case. The application is allowed. As per Rule 20 (4) and Rule 21 of Delhi Prisons

(Visitors of Prisons) Rules, 1988, SI Dhirendra Singh is permitted to interrogate

the above named accused in Tihar Jail. The Superintendent, Tihar Jail is directed

to allow the said interrogation. Let copy of this order be given dasti to the

applicant, as prayed. SI Dhirendra Singh or HC Naresh Kumar shall

communicate the order to the Superintendent for compliance. For this purpose,

the order shall be treated as a direction addressed to the Superintendent.


Delhi 15.12.2015

FIR no. 130/11PS EOW


As per report of Ahlmad, the Parcha Yadasht is not traceable. Some

more time is sought to trace the said Parcha Yadasht. At request of Ahlmad, time

is given.

List on 15.01.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015

DD no. 25A dated 26.11.2015PS Alipur

15.12.2015Fresh application is received from Institute of Human Behaviour &

Allied Sciences (IHBAS) under the signatures of Dr. Vishal Dhiman counter

signed by Dr. Deepak Kumar.

Present: Ld. Substitute APP for State.Dr. Rahul Kumar, Junior Resident Doctor.

It is stated by aforementioned doctor that husband of the patient Dr.

V. P. Singh has not contacted the hospital as yet. As per the said letter, the patient

requires further hospitalization for her management and treatment. Submissions

are heard. The record is perused. It is directed that aforementioned patient Mamta

be kept in Institute of Human Behaviour & Allied Sciences (IHBAS) for the

period of hospitalization and treatment, as per rules and medical opinion or until

the further orders of the court, if passed sooner. Furthermore, IO HC Pawan

Kumar is directed to contact Dr. V. P. Singh R/o 25D, B. D. Estate, First Floor,

Timar Pur, Delhi and to ensure the due service of the court notice for his

appearance before this court on the next date of hearing. Copy of this order be

given dasti to Dr. Rahul Kumar, as prayed.

List on 04.01.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015

FIR no. 460/15 PS Alipur

15.12.2015File taken up today on an application for bail under Section 437 of

Criminal Procedure Code filed on behalf of applicant/accused Rohtash.

Present: Ld. Substitute APP for the State.Mr. Suresh Bhardwaj, legal aid counsel for accused/applicant.

Arguments are heard on the said bail application. It is argued by ld.

counsel for accused that the accused is languishing in judicial custody for

approximately five months. As per counsel for accused, the chargesheet has

already been filed and the charge has already been framed. Counsel for accused

submits that the trial shall take its own course and the accused cannot be held

behind the bars for the entire continuity of the trial.

Ld. APP has opposed the present bail application on the ground that

despite the charge has been framed not only single prosecution witness has been

examined as yet. Ld. APP submits that if the accused is allowed to be at large

accused shall temper with evidence and shall influence the witnesses.

I have heard arguments and perused the record carefully.

I find merits in the submissions of Ld. APP that despite framing of

charge, examination of prosecution witness is not begin as yet. The record

reveals that the next date fixed for examination of witness is 07.01.2016. Keeping

in mind the submissions of Ld. APP and the apprehension expressed thereon and

upon finding merits therein I deem it appropriate to disallow the present

application as of now. Considering that the prosecution witnesses specially the

complainant has not been examined as yet, I am not inclined to grant the benefit

of bail to the accused at this stage. Consequently, the bail application is hereby

dismissed. Further, in the interest of justice, counsel for accused is granted

opportunity to file a fresh application as and when the prosecution

witness/complaint Sandeep is examined. Copy of this order be given dasti, as

prayed.


Delhi 15.12.2015

FIR No. 512/14PS Alipur



This is an application for remand of accused in judicial custody for

fourteen days.

Present: Ld. Substitute APP for State with IO SI Ravinder.Accused Ravi Bhardwaj @ Bunty produced from judicial custody.Counsel for accused.

It is stated by the IO that the investigation is still pending and he

shall file the chargesheet shortly. It is further submitted by the IO that the

accused is a parole jumper and is involved in a murder case. Further, there is

possibility of accused to flee from justice and influencing the witnesses and

tamper with evidence. It is also stated by the IO that the accused is a habitual

offender and is languishing in JC in a murder case. The IO has expresses his

strong apprehension that the accused may prejudice the safety of the

complainant.

Submissions of IO are heard and are taken on record. Sufficiency

of ground of detention and continued custody are examined. Same are found to

be satisfactory.

I find merits in the submissions of the IO. In these circumstances, I

deem it appropriate to extend the judicial custody of accused by fourteen days.

Accused is remanded to judicial custody to be produced before the court of Ld.

Duty MM on 29.12.2015.

(Harjeet Singh Jaspal) Metropolitan Magistrate (Reliever)

Delhi 15.12.2015

CC no. 722/1


Accused in person.

Accused has made part payment of Rs.2300/ to authorized

representative of the complainant, which is accepted by him on behalf of the

complainant.

Put up for remaining payment on 05.01.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015

CC no. 619/1


Accused in person.

Accused has made part payment of Rs.2300/ to authorized

representative of the complainant, which is accepted by him on behalf of the

complainant.

Put up for remaining payment on 12.01.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015

CC No. 596/1, 598/1, 599/1, 602/1, 608/1 and 621/1


Accused is absent.

Nonbailable warrants issued against the accused received back

unexecuted. Issue fresh nonbailable warrants against the accused.

List on 14.01.2016.

(Ashish Aggarwal)Chief Metropolitan Magistrate(North)

Delhi. 15.12.2015

CC no. 622/1


Report on the process is perused. Complainant is directed to furnish

the latest address of the accused by the next date of hearing.

Renotify on 14.01.2016. (Ashish Aggarwal)


15.12.2015

CC no. 617/1


Accused is absent.

Process issued in terms of last order not received back. Fresh

process be issued in terms of last order returnable on 14.01.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015

CC no. 618/1

15.12.2015Present: Authorized representative of the complainant.

Authorized representative of complainant has furnished the address

of the guarantor. Authorized representative of complainant submits that the

guarantor must be aware of the present address of the accused. He submits that

the guarantor may be called to the court to disclose the address of the accused. In

view of his submissions, it is directed that the guarantor whose name and address

are disclosed by the authorized representative of the complainant shall be called

through notice with directions to disclose the address of the accused.



15.12.2015

CC no. 217/1 and 592/1

15.12.2015Present: Authorized representative of complainant with counsel for

complainant.Accused and his guarantor are absent.

Notice issued to the guarantor of accused received back served.

Guarantor of accused has not appeared despite service of notice. He has not

disclosed the address of the accused. It appears that he is deliberately withholding

information of whereabouts of the accused so as to shield him from prosecution.

Issue bailable warrants in the sum of Rs.5,000/ against the guarantor of accused

at his office address.



15.12.2015

CC no. 999/1 and 1410/1


Accused is absent.

Nonbailable warrants issued against the accused received back

unexecuted. Issue fresh nonbailable warrants against the accused to be executed

through the SHO.



15.12.2015

CC no. 1380/1

15.12.2015Present: Authorized representative of complainant with counsel for

complainant. Accused and his guarantor are absent.

Bailable warrants issued against the guarantor of accused received

back executed. Guarantor of accused has not appeared despite repeated calls.

Issue nonbailable warrants against the guarantor of accused.

List on 14.01.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015

PNB Housing Finance Ltd. Vs. Sandeep Chaudhary

15.12.2015This is a fresh application under section 14 of the Securitization

and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act,

2002. It shall be checked and registered.

Present: Proxy counsel for applicant bank.

Proxy counsel for applicant bank prays for adjournment to produce

the original documents. At his request, the case is adjourned for consideration on

18.12.2015.


Delhi 15.12.2015

PNB Housing Finance Ltd. Vs. Sanjeev Chaudhary

15.12.2015This is a fresh application under section 14 of the Securitization

and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act,

2002. It shall be checked and registered.

Present: Proxy counsel for applicant bank.

Proxy counsel for applicant bank prays for adjournment to produce

the original documents. At his request, the case is adjourned for consideration on

18.12.2015.


Delhi 15.12.2015

C.C.No. 13560/1/10

15.12.2015

Present: None.

By order passed by the Ld. MM (North), Rohini Courts, Delhi this case

has been ordered to be transferred to Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.

Accordingly, file be put up before Ld. CMM of the said district on date

fixed.

Case file, complete in all respects, be sent to the court of Ld. CMM of the

said district.

(Ashish Aggarwal) Chief Metropolitan

Magistrate(North) Delhi. 15.12.2015

C.C.No. 138/1/15

15.12.2015

Present: None.




fixed.


said district.



C.C.No. 772/1/06

15.12.2015

Present: None.


has been ordered to be transferred to West District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.


fixed.


said district.



C.C.No. 71/1/14

15.12.2015

Present: None.




fixed.


said district.



C.C.No. 13433/1/10

15.12.2015

Present: None.




fixed.


said district.



C.C.No. 13529/1/10

15.12.2015

Present: None.




fixed.


said district.



C.C.No. 164/1/14

15.12.2015

Present: None.




fixed.


said district.



C.C.No. 2913/07

15.12.2015

Present: None.




fixed.


said district.



C.C.No. 14/1/15

15.12.2015

Present: None.




fixed.


said district.



C.C.No. 387/1/15

15.12.2015

Present: None.




fixed.


said district.



C.C.No. 13762/09

15.12.2015

Present: None.




fixed.


said district.

(Ashish Aggarwal)

Chief Metropolitan Magistrate(North) Delhi. 15.12.2015

C.C.No. 75/1/14

15.12.2015

Present: None.


has been ordered to be transferred to New Delhi District, Patiala House Courts, Delhi.


fixed.


said district.

(Ashish Aggarwal)


C.C.No. 21/1/14

15.12.2015

Present: None.


has been ordered to be transferred to East District, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi.


fixed.


said district.

(Ashish Aggarwal)


C.C.No. 13815/1/06

15.12.2015

Present: None.




fixed.


said district.

(Ashish Aggarwal)


C.C.No. 186/1/14

15.12.2015

Present: None.


has been ordered to be transferred to East District, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi.


fixed.


said district.

(Ashish Aggarwal)


C.C.No. 252/1/15

15.12.2015

Present: None.




fixed.


said district.

(Ashish Aggarwal)


C.C.No. 7346/01/07

15.12.2015

Present: None.




fixed.


said district.

(Ashish Aggarwal)


C.C.No. 13435/1/10

15.12.2015

Present: None.




fixed.


said district.

(Ashish Aggarwal)


C.C.No. 162/1/14

15.12.2015

Present: None.




fixed.


said district.

(Ashish Aggarwal)


C.C.No. 157/1/14

15.12.2015

Present: None.




fixed.


said district.

(Ashish Aggarwal)


C.C.No. 203/1/13

15.12.2015

Present: None.


has been ordered to be transferred to South East District, Saket Courts, Delhi.


fixed.


said district.

(Ashish Aggarwal)


C.C.No. 13560/1/10

15.12.2015

Present: None.




fixed.


said district.

(Ashish Aggarwal)


CC No. 377/1/13


Nobody has appeared on behalf of the complainant. Complainant

had also not appeared on the last eight dates of hearing. As per report on notice,

the complainant has also not been residing at the given address. In these

circumstances, the complaint is dismissed in default and for nonprosecution. File

be consigned to record room.

(Ashish Aggarwal)Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (North)

Delhi 15.12.2015

CC No. 356/1/15

15.12.2015Present: Complainant in person.

There is no report regarding previous process. Let fresh notice be

issued as per previous order returnable on 03.03.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015

CC No. 545/1/15


Nobody has appeared on behalf of the complainant. Last and final

opportunity is granted to the complainant to appear and to prosecute this case.

Renotify on 15.03.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015



Accused with counsel.

No PW is present today. Put up for PE on 17.02.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015



None for accused.

Report on bailable warrants is perused. Let notice be issued to the

surety of the accused returnable on 25.02.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015



Neither Ld. APP nor the accused persons have appeared. On the

last two dates of hearing too, the accused persons had not appeared. Let bailable

warrants in the sum of Rs.15,000/ be issued against the accused persons.

List on 02.03.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015



None for accused.

Report of process server who executed the process under Section

82 of Criminal Procedure Code is on record. Ld. Substitute APP submits that the

process has been duly executed. He states that there is no requirement of

recording statement of process server as it would only delay the case.

In view of the report of process server and persistent absence of

accused, the Court is satisfied that accused has absconded. He is declared

absconder. Intimation in this regard be sent to concerned SHO. File be consigned

to record room to be revived as and when the accused is found.


Delhi 15.12.2015



Accused persons have not appeared despite repeated calls. Issue

bailable warrants in the sum of Rs.5,000/ against the accused persons returnable

on 22.03.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015



Presence of the accused could not be secured through bailable

warrants. Issue nonbailable warrants against the accused to be executed through

the SHO returnable on 16.03.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015



None for accused.

Accused has not appeared. On the last date of hearing also accused

had not appeared. Issue bailable warrants in the sum of Rs.15,000/ against the

accused returnable on 23.02.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015



As per report, the address of the accused is not complete. IO is

directed to explain whether he had verified the address of the accused before

submitting the chargesheet. Let notice be issued to the IO for the said

explanation.

List on 09.03.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015



Accused has not appeared. In the interest of justice, accused is

granted one more opportunity to appear.

Renotify on 22.03.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015



None for accused.

Accused has not appeared despite repeated calls. In the interest of

justice, accused is granted one more opportunity to appear.

List on 16.03.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015

FIR No. 67/10PS Crime Branch


None for accused.

No PW is present today. Accused has not appeared. He is granted

one more opportunity to appear.

List on 22.02.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015



Counsel for accused.

Counsel for accused has filed an application for exemption from

personal appearance on behalf of accused. Heard arguments. For the reasons

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

from his personal appearance for today only.

Put up for appearance of accused and for PE on 25.05.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015



All accused persons on bail with counsel.

No PW is present today. Put up for PE on 17.03.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015



Accused with counsel.

PW Sunder has been served with summons yet he has not appeared.

Let bailable warrants in the sum of Rs.15,000/ be issued against him returnable

on 11.01.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015




Present: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Ld. Substitute APP for State.

A letter has been received under the signatures of Sh. Vikramjit

Singh, Dy. Commissioner of Police, Outer District, Delhi. The said letter is

perused and the same is found to be satisfactory.

Let the complainant be called before the court on the next date of

hearing.

List for appearance of the complainant on 02.02.2016.

(Harjeet Singh Jaspal)Reliever Metropolitan Magistrate (North)

Delhi 15.12.2015

FIR No. 1487/14PS S. P. Badli

15.12.2015Ld. Presiding Officer is busy in dealing with transfer files under Section 138

of Negotiable Instruments Act.


This is a police report. It alleges commission of offence under Section 3 of

Delhi Prevention of Defacement of Property Act, 2007. As per allegations, the accused had

affixed a board on an electricity pole.


marking”. The placing of a board on an electricity pole does not amount to defacement by

writing or marking as held by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of T. S. Marwah Vs.

State 2008 (4) JCC 2561. Although the said decision was rendered in the context of Section

3 of the West Bengal Prevention of Defacement of Property Act, 1976, the decision equally

applies to the present case since the provisions of Section 3 of the West Bengal Prevention

of Defacement of Property Act, 1976 are analogous to that of Section 3 of Delhi Prevention

of Defacement of Property Act, 2007. Hence, Section 3 of Delhi Prevention of Defacement

of Property Act, 2007 is not attracted to the facts of the present case. Cognizance is

declined. Proceedings are dropped. The police report is rejected. Bail bonds of the accused

are cancelled. His surety is discharged. Case property, if any, be returned to the rightful

claimant. File be consigned to record room.

Though the accused is discharged under 3 D.P.D.P Act, let the matter be

brought to the notice of concerned officials of MCD.

Let the copy of this order along with copy of the police report be sent to the

officer concerned MCD, North.

Let the copy of this order be sent to MHC(M) concerned.


Delhi/15.12.2015


























Delhi/15.12.2015


15.12.2015Ld. Presiding Officer is busy in dealing with transfer files as per

Negotiable Instruments Amendment Ordinance.

Present: Ld. APP for State.Complainant Mr. Chander Veer in person.

Report is perused. Complainant submits that he has no objection if

the untraced report is accepted. Statement of complainant is recorded separately

in this regard.

Elaborate investigation has been carried out by the investigating

agency. Despite efforts of the investigating agency, stolen articles have not been

recovered and offender could not be traced. Untraced report is accepted in view

of the statement of the complainant recorded today. File be sent back to

concerned police station with copy of this order and be preserved to be reopened

as and when any clue is found. Copy thereof shall be retained in the Court with

the original ordersheet and shall be consigned to record room after due

compliance.

Copy of this order be given dasti to the complainant, as prayed.


Delhi 15.12.2015




Present: Ld. APP for State.Complainant Mr. Jodha Singh in person.



in this regard.








compliance.



Delhi 15.12.2015




Present: Ld. APP for State.Complainant Mr. Navneet Kumar in person.



in this regard.








compliance.



Delhi 15.12.2015




Present: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Ld. Substitute APP for State.

A letter has been received under the signatures of Sh. Vikramjit

Singh, Dy. Commissioner of Police, Outer District, Delhi. The said letter is

perused and the same is found to be satisfactory.

Let the complainant be called before the court on the next date of

hearing.

List for appearance of the complainant on 02.02.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015




Present: Ld. Substitute APP for State.IO is not present.LRs of the deceased is not present.

Fresh court notice be issued to the LRs of the deceased through

their counsel S. K Gupta for the next date of hearing.

List on 08.02.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015




Present: Ld. Substitute APP for State.IO is not present.LRs of the deceased is not present.

Fresh court notice be issued to the LRs of the deceased Ms. Mala

Devi for appearance before the court on the next date of hearing.

Court notice also be issued to the counsel Sh. S. Murli Manoharam,

for the complainant, to appear in person before the court on the next date of

hearing.

List on 08.02.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015




Present: Ld. Substitute APP for State.Applicant/IO SI Vijay Kumar from MACT.Sh. Gurdeep Singh, son of the superdar in person.Sh. Mohan Singh, Superdar is not present.

The aforementioned son of the superdar submits that he could not

arrange the FDR amount and he is ready to surrender the vehicle in question. He

also submits that the permission may be granted to get the vehicle released upon

submitting the FDR amount. Submissions are heard and record is perused.

Applicant/IO SI Vijay Kumar is directed to take the vehicle bearing

registration no. DL1LP9533, in his custody and file the report thereof before

this court within two days.

Liberty is granted to the superdar to move a fresh application for

submitting the FDR amount in terms of order dated 10.12.2015.

In the interest of justice, the matter is kept pending.

Let the copy of this order be given to the son of the superdar and

the applicant/IO.

Matter shall now be taken up on 28.01.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015




Present: Ld. Substitute APP for State.Accused with counsel.

Matter is listed for PE. PW6 HC Virender is present. He is

examinedinchief and partly crossexamined. His remaining crossexamination

is deferred due to paucity of time.

Put up for remaining crossexamination of PW6 on 15.02.2016.


Delhi 15.12.2015

FIR No. 1532/14PS Prashant Vihar

15.12.2015Ld. Presiding Officer is busy in dealing with transfer files under Section 138 of

Negotiable Instruments Act.

Present: Ld. Substitute APP for State.Accused Kanchan Arora with counsel.

Previously, the accused has filed an application for plea bargaining. Today,

accused submits that she wishes to withdraw the said application for plea bargaining. Her

statement, to this effect, is recorded on the application itself. In view of her statement, the

application is dismissed as withdrawn.

At this stage, accused submits that she wishes to plead guilty. Accused has

pleaded guilty to the offence punishable under Section 3 of Delhi Prevention of Defacement of

Property Act, 2007. Accused is informed about the consequences of pleading guilty. She

however reiterates her plea of guilt. Her statement is recorded separately. In view of the

voluntary plea of guilt by accused, she is convicted of offence punishable under Section 3 of

Delhi Prevention of Defacement of Property Act, 2007.

Arguments on the point of sentence are heard. Having regard to the fact that

accused has voluntarily admitted her mistake and has not tried to put up a false defence, a

lenient view is warranted. Regard is also had to the antecedents, age and character of the

offender, which preeminently show that there is a high possibility of reformation. For offence

under Section 3 of Delhi Prevention of Defacement of Property Act, 2007, convict is sentenced

to pay fine of Rs.5,000/. In default of payment of fine, the convict shall undergo simple

imprisonment for ten days. Fine is paid. Bail bonds of convict are cancelled. Her surety is

discharged. Original documents, if any, be returned to the rightful claimant against

acknowledgment. Endorsement, if any, be also cancelled. Case property be disposed off through

District Nazir. Copy of this order be sent to the concerned MHC(M). The case is disposed off.

File be consigned to record room.


Delhi 15.12.2015

CC no. 117/S/15 Present: None. (Ashish Aggarwal) Chief...

Documents

Transcript of CC no. 117/S/15 Present: None. (Ashish Aggarwal) Chief...