Delhi High Court Upholds Partial Summoning in Criminal Intimidation Case

Respondent Summoned Under Section 506 IPC; Other Charges Dismissed Due to Lack of Prima Facie Evidence

In a recent decision, the Delhi High Court, presided over by Justice Neena Bansal Krishna, has upheld the summons against one respondent for criminal intimidation while dismissing other charges due to insufficient evidence. The case, titled "Rajan Sareen v. State NCT of Delhi," revolves around allegations of defamation, breach of confidentiality, and theft of confidential data during employment, among other charges.

The petitioner, Rajan Sareen, a director of Crescore Wealth Management (P) Ltd. and Unor Exim Pvt. Ltd., accused former employees of conspiring against him by filing false complaints, leading to multiple FIRs. The case focuses on the actions of Respondent No. 2, Sangeeta Nagpal, who was accused of threatening Sareen with false molestation and sexual harassment complaints if legal actions were pursued.

The court found no prima facie case under Sections 182, 211, 406, and 500 IPC against the respondents, citing the lack of sufficient evidence. It noted that complaints of defamation require clear intent to harm reputation, which was not established in this case. Similarly, allegations under Section 406 IPC for breach of confidentiality were dismissed as the data and documents were held in connection with official duties without evidence of dishonest intent.

However, the court upheld the summoning of Sangeeta Nagpal under Section 506 IPC for criminal intimidation, based on testimonies indicating she threatened the petitioner in the presence of office staff. The judgment emphasized the importance of prima facie evidence in summoning decisions, dismissing the petitioner's claims due to insufficient support for other charges.

The court's decision reflects a careful evaluation of evidence, underscoring the necessity of substantiated claims in legal proceedings. The case continues with the focus now on the criminal intimidation charge against Nagpal.

Bottom Line:

Allegations of criminal offenses such as defamation, criminal intimidation, breach of confidentiality, and theft of confidential data during employment must be supported by clear, prima facie evidence to justify summoning the accused for trial.

Statutory provision(s): Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 182, 211, 406, 500, 506, 34, 120B; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 482

Rajan Sareen v. State NCT of Delhi, (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2822132