Order 9

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: 1/2
14 CA / 190/2024
ANUJ TYAGI Vs. STATE AND ORS.
28.07.2026
Video Conferencing facility is active throughout the
proceedings during the day.
Present: Sh. Piyush, Ld. counsel for the appellant along with the
appellant in person.
Sh. Pankaj Bhatia, Ld. Addl. PP for the State/respondent
No.1.
Sh. Praveen Kumar Singh, Ld. Counsel for all the
respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4 along with said respondents
in person.
Arguments heard.
It is submitted by Ld. Counsel for the appellant that the
Trial Court has acquitted the respondents on three grounds, i.e., delay
in lodging the complaint and FIR, absence of independent public
witnesses and contradictions in the testimony of the prosecution
witnesses.
It is further submitted that the appellant had immediately
made a call at 100 number and a DD entry was also recorded on the
date of the incident itself. It is further submitted that the complainant
took the treatment in the hospital on the same day. However, due to
pain, the written complaint was lodged after delay of two days. It is
further submitted that the victim/complainant has supported the
allegations in question as well as the case of the prosecution during
recording of his testimony before the Trial Court and, therefore, the
impugned judgment be set aside and the respondents be convicted for
the alleged offences.
-- 1 of 2 --
2/2
On the contrary, it is submitted on behalf of the
respondents that there is a delay in lodging the complaint and FIR, as
the same was an afterthought and was filed after due deliberations. It
is further submitted that the MLC of the victim/complainant/appellant
does not disclose the names of the accused persons despite the fact
that they were known to the complainant. It is further submitted that
the accused persons/respondents have been falsely implicated in the
present matter due to the ongoing property dispute between the parties
and that multiple civil and criminal litigations are pending between
them. It is further submitted that the appellant failed to establish his
presence at the spot at the time of the alleged incident. He further
failed to disclose the particulars of the car/vehicle involved in the
alleged offence, and the complainant also failed to lodge a complaint
with the concerned Police Station immediately despite the fact that he
was fit to make a statement.
Time sought by Ld. Counsel for the appellants for filing
citations in support of his contentions. Let same be filed with advance
copy to the opposite party.
Time sought on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 to 5 for
filing written submissions. Let same be filed with advance copy to the
opposite party.
List for filing of citation and written synopsis on
05.10.2026.
(Shilpi Jain)
ASJ-02, Central, THC
Delhi-28.07.2026(A)
-- 2 of 2 --