Full Order Text
Order 2 · 29 Aug 2025 · CNR DLCT020222472025
Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS Pdf Text: Ct. Cases / 856/2025 ZEESHAN AHMED Vs. KAMAL AHMED /0 29.08.2025 Present: Complainant in person. This is a fresh complaint under Section 223 read with Section 210 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Vide order dated 21.05.2025, this court had issued notices to the proposed accused persons in view of the first proviso to Section 223 BNSS, which mandates notice to be issued before taking cognizance. Today, Ms. Nasrin, Ms. Mahira, and Mr. Kamal Ahmed have joined the VC proceedings. However, neither Ms. Mahira nor Mr. Kamal Ahmed are switching on their cameras despite repeated requests. Mr. Saifuddin, Ld. Counsel, has appeared for Mr. Kamal Ahmed and Mr. Imran. However, Mr. Imran has not joined the proceedings as of now. Be that as it may, this Court has come across the recent pronouncement of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in Brand Protectors India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Anil Kumar, wherein it has been clarified that under the new statutory framework, before taking cognizance, pre-summoning evidence must be recorded, and only thereafter can the Court consider whether to issue notice to proposed accused persons. In view of the above legal position, this Court deems it appropriate to proceed with pre-summoning evidence. On request, adjournment is granted to the complainant for leading pre-summoning evidence. It is clarified that the proposed accused persons are not required to appear until and unless they receive a notice from this Court. Put up for pre-summoning evidence on 12.01.2026. (Dr. Raj Kumar Singh) Judicial Magistrate First Class-05/Central Delhi/29.08.2025 -- 1 of 1 --