Allegations of Assault and Financial Misconduct Deemed Vague and Unsupported
In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court, presided over by Justice Neena Bansal Krishna, dismissed the petition filed by Smt. Reema Arora against the State NCT of Delhi and others. The petition sought to challenge the orders of the Magistrate and the Additional Sessions Judge, which had dismissed her complaint citing insufficient evidence and vague allegations.
The case stemmed from an incident where Reema Arora alleged that she was threatened and assaulted by Uttam Chand Meena and his wife Gargi Meena. The complaint mentioned an incident where kerosene oil was poured on her, and she was threatened to withdraw a case fixed for a later date. Additionally, Arora accused the respondents of coercing her into a financial scheme, taking Rs. 6,000 without providing any returns.
However, the court noted several discrepancies in the allegations. The Medical Legal Certificate (MLC) presented did not corroborate the claim of physical assault, as no injuries were recorded by the examining doctor. Furthermore, the delay in lodging the complaint, which was filed 3.5 hours after the alleged incident, remained unexplained.
The court also found the financial allegations regarding the R.C.M. scheme to be unsupported by any documentary evidence or specifics such as the date and manner of payment. The absence of testimonies from independent witnesses or neighbors, despite claims of their presence during the incident, further weakened the case.
Justice Krishna emphasized that for a complaint to proceed under Section 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code, it must be supported by substantial and concrete evidence. Mere vague allegations without prima facie material do not warrant the summoning of the accused. The court upheld the previous judgments, affirming that the complaint did not disclose any prima facie offense.
The dismissal of the petition underscores the judiciary's commitment to ensuring that allegations in criminal cases are substantiated with credible evidence before proceeding, thereby safeguarding against frivolous litigations.
Bottom Line:
Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. dismissed as allegations made by the petitioner were found to be vague, unsupported by prima facie material, and lacking sufficient grounds for proceeding.
Statutory provision(s): Section 482 Cr.P.C., Section 200 Cr.P.C., Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., Sections 307/511/323/34 IPC
Smt. Reema Arora v. State NCT of Delhi, (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc id # 2856697
