Final Order 14

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: 30 Ct. Case 97/2023
VED PRAKSH
Vs.
THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI
(Vasant Kunj North)
1
02.09.2025
Present: 	Ld. LAC Sh. Maninder Dubey for complainant.
Sh. Mukul Kumar, Ld. Addl. PP for the State/R1.
Today the matter is listed for order on summoning.
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. The present complaint has been filed by Sh. Ved Prakash, son
of Late Sh. Sada Ram, aged 66 years, resident of House No. A-23,
behind Desu wali Gali, Mahipal Pur, Delhi-37, under Section
156(3) 	read 	with 	Section 	200 	of 	the 	Code 	of 	Criminal
Procedure, 1973, seeking registration of FIR and/or direct
summoning 	of 	the 	accused 	persons 	under 	Sections
504/506/120-B/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with
Section 	3 	of 	the 	Scheduled 	Castes 	and 	Scheduled 	Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
1.2. The complainant is a citizen of India belonging to Scheduled
Caste (Jatav/Chamar community) as evidenced by his caste
certificate 	dated 	12.01.1970 	(Ex.CW1/2). 	The 	complaint
alleges serious caste-based discrimination, denial of water
supply, and untouchability practices by the accused persons
namely:
1. 	Amit Kumar, son of Sh. Dharamveer
2. 	Smt. Sonia, wife of Sh. Amit Kumar
3. 	Smt. Bala, wife of Late Aman Sehrawat
4. 	Smt. Renu, wife of Sh. Vijay Sansanwal
-- 1 of 15 --
30 Ct. Case 97/2023
VED PRAKSH
Vs.
THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI
(Vasant Kunj North)
2
All accused persons are residents of opposite Nala Wala Tube
Well, Road No.1, Mahipalpur, New Delhi-110037.
1.3. The complainant is represented by Sh. Manindra Dubey,
LAC/Advocate, as this is a Legal Aid Case.
2. ALLEGATIONS
2.1. The complainant has made the following detailed and specific
allegations in his complaint filed on 25.09.2023:
Background and Context:
a) The complainant is a permanent resident of House No. F-
392, Village & Post Mahipalpur, having a legitimate water
connection from Nala Tubewell, Road No. 1, Mahipalpur,
belonging to Delhi Jal Board, for which he regularly pays
bills.
b) The complainant and his community members have been
accessing water from this tubewell for generations without
any 	previous 	opposition 	from 	the 	accused 	persons 	or
anyone else in the locality.
Primary Incident (02.06.2023):
c) On 02.06.2023, after the re-boring of the tubewell in the
locality, Delhi Jal Board officials arrived at approximately
10:00 AM to connect water pipes for supplying water to the
complainant’s mohalla.
d) The accused persons intercepted and stopped the Delhi
-- 2 of 15 --
30 Ct. Case 97/2023
VED PRAKSH
Vs.
THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI
(Vasant Kunj North)
3
Jal 	Board 	officials, 	using 	casteist 	and 	discriminatory
language: “Bhag Jao, nahi to tum sab bhi peete jaoge, ab is
tube well se paani kewal hum log lenge, in chamaro ko paani
ab nahi dia jaega” (Go away, otherwise you all will also get
beaten up, now only we will take water from this tubewell,
water will not be given to these “chamars”).
e) Subsequently, all four accused persons - Amit Kumar,
Sonia, 	Bala, 	and 	Renu 	- 	collectively 	approached 	the
complainant and his family members, using abusive and
threatening language: “Ab tum chamaron ko yahan se paani
ka line nahi milega chahe jo kar lo aur tumhara aana-jaana
bhi band karenge, nahi maanoge to maar bhi khaoge” (Now
you “chamars” will not get water line from here, do whatever
you want, and we will also stop your movement, if you don’t
agree then you will also get beaten up).
f) Due to threats and intimidation by the accused persons,
the Delhi Jal Board staff immediately left the site without
completing the water connection work for the complainant
and other community member.
g) The accused persons threatened that if the complainant
attempted to restore the water connection in future, his
entire area/locality would be prevented from getting water
connection from anywhere.
-- 3 of 15 --
30 Ct. Case 97/2023
VED PRAKSH
Vs.
THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI
(Vasant Kunj North)
4
h) Even when water tankers visited the complainant’s
locality for water supply, the accused persons did not allow
the tankers to supply water to the complainant and his
community members.
i) On 09.06.2023, the complainant filed written complaints
with signatures of 33 persons from his locality to:
(1) Chairperson, National Commission for SC/ST (L.C.
No. 526/23) – Ex.CW1/3
(2) DCP, South-West District, Delhi (Diary No. 7915) –
Ex.CW1/4
(3) 	MLA 	Sh. 	B.S. 	Joon, 	Bijwasan 	Vidhan 	Sabha 	-
Ex.CW1/5
j) On 10.06.2023, complainant received acknowledgment
message 	from 	Delhi 	Police 	regarding 	assignment 	of
complaint No. 81710622300526 to Enquiry Officer Sh.
Mukesh Kumar, SI (PIS No. 28961384) – Ex.CW1/6
m) 	On 	17.07.2023, 	complainant 	filed 	complaint 	with
Chairperson, 	Delhi 	Jal 	Board 	for 	restoration 	of 	water
connection – Ex.CW1/7
k) Despite multiple complaints to various authorities, no
effective action was taken to address the discrimination or
restore water supply.
-- 4 of 15 --
30 Ct. Case 97/2023
VED PRAKSH
Vs.
THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI
(Vasant Kunj North)
5
3. PRE-SUMMONING EVIDENCE
The Court recorded pre-summoning evidence between August
2024 and July 2025:
3.1. CW-1: 	Ved 	Prakash(Complainant) 	- 	Examined 	on
16.08.2024.
The 	complainant, 	appearing 	as 	CW-1, 	reaffirmed 	his
complaint allegations on solemn affirmation. Key points of his
testimony:
a) Confirmed his identity as Ved Prakash, son of Sada Ram,
resident of House No. A-23, behind Desu wali Gali, Mahipal
Pur, Delhi-37, belonging to SC Caste Jatav (Chamar).
b) Detailed the incident of 02.06.2023, stating that after
re-boring of the tubewell, Delhi Jal Board officials came to
connect water pipes when accused persons stopped them,
using casteist slurs and threats.
c) Narrated the specific abusive language used by accused
persons 	against 	him 	and 	his 	family 	members,
emphasizing the caste-based nature of the discrimination.
d) Testified about filing multiple complaints with various
authorities including SC/ST Commission, DCP South West,
Local MLA, and Delhi Jal Board, but receiving no effective
redressal.
e) Produced and proved the following documents:
-- 5 of 15 --
30 Ct. Case 97/2023
VED PRAKSH
Vs.
THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI
(Vasant Kunj North)
6
1. Aadhar Card - Ex.CW1/1 (OSR)
2. Caste Certificate - Ex.CW1/2 (OSR)
3. Complaint to SC/ST Commission dated 09.06.2023 -
Ex.CW1/3
4. Complaint to DCP South West dated 09.06.2023 	–
Ex.CW1/4
5. Complaint to MLA Sh. B.S. Joon dated 09.06.2023 –
Ex.CW1/5
6. Message from SI Mukesh Kumar dated 10.06.2023 –
Ex.CW1/6
7. Complaint 	to 	Delhi 	Jal 	Board 	Chairperson 	dated
17.07.2023 - Ex.CW1/7
3.2. CW-2: Vijay Kumar (Eye-Witness) - Examined on 15.05.2025
a) 	Sh. Vijay Kumar, son of Sh. Ram Pal, resident of House No.
A-22, 	behind 	Desu 	wali 	Gali, 	Mahipal 	Pur, 	Delhi-37,
appeared as CW-2. His testimony included:
b) 	Confirmed his identity and caste status as belonging to SC
Caste Jatav (Chamar), residing in the immediate vicinity of
the complainant.
c) 	Claimed 	to 	be 	an 	eye-witness 	to 	the 	incident 	dated
02.06.2023, corroborating the complainant’s version of
events.
d) 	Testified that he witnessed accused persons stopping
Delhi 	Jal 	Board 	officials 	and 	using 	identical 	casteist
language as narrated by the complainant: “Bhag Jao, nahi
to tum sab bhi peete jaoge, ab is tube well se paani kewal
hum log lenge, in chamaro ko paani ab nahi dia jaega”.
-- 6 of 15 --
30 Ct. Case 97/2023
VED PRAKSH
Vs.
THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI
(Vasant Kunj North)
7
e) 	Confirmed that accused persons Amit Kumar, Sonia, Bala,
and Renu collectively abused the complainant and his
family with threats and casteist remarks.
f) 	Additionally testified that before the incident date, JE
Prashant Verma of Delhi Jal Board had visited the spot and
assured 	appropriate 	action 	for 	water 	connection
restoration, but no action was taken till date.
3.3. CW-3: Prashant Verma (Delhi Jal Board Official) - Examined
on 26.07.2025.
Sh. Prashant Verma, son of Sh. Om Prakash Verma, presently
working as Assistant Engineer (AE), Bijwasan Constituency,
DDA SFS Flats, Sector-7, Dwarka, New Delhi, appeared as CW-
3. His testimony revealed:
a) When questioned about his whereabouts on 02.06.2023, he
stated: “I do not remember. However, I was posted at Mahipal
Pur area at that time.”
b) He could recollect that boring work was done in the area of
complainant Ved Prakash but claimed: “I did not face any
problem or issue while carrying out the work of boring of
tubewell.”
c) Regarding complaints related to tubewell boring, he stated:
“I will have to check from the records whether any such
complaint was received in the office, but I do not recollect the
-- 7 of 15 --
30 Ct. Case 97/2023
VED PRAKSH
Vs.
THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI
(Vasant Kunj North)
8
same as of now.”
d) Upon perusal of records, it was found that no complaint was
delivered or received at his office at Mahipal Pur, though
complaints were received at offices of DCP, MLA Bijwasan,
and MLA Malviya Nagar.
e) The 	witness 	was 	discharged 	as 	learned 	counsel 	for
complainant had no further questions.
f) Significantly, this witness did not support the complainant’s
version 	regarding 	any 	problems 	or 	caste-based
discrimination during the boring work. He also did not face
any issue while carrying out boring of the tubewell on
02.06.2023.
4. Closure of Pre-Summoning Evidence:
On 	26.07.2025, 	complainant 	Sh. 	Ved 	Prakash 	closed 	pre-
summoning evidence stating: “I do not want to examine any
other witness in my pre-summoning evidence, therefore, the same
be 	closed.” 	Accordingly, 	the 	pre-summoning 	evidence 	was
closed.
5. ARGUMENTS
Arguments by Complainant’s Counsel Sh. Maninder Dubey, LAC:
a) Learned counsel for the complainant argued that this is a
clear case of caste-based discrimination and practice of
untouchability in violation of constitutional provisions and
-- 8 of 15 --
30 Ct. Case 97/2023
VED PRAKSH
Vs.
THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI
(Vasant Kunj North)
9
SC/ST (POA) Act.
b) It was contended that the complainant and CW-2, both
belonging to the same caste and locality, have consistently
narrated 	the 	same 	version 	of 	events, 	establishing 	the
credibility of allegations.
c) The counsel emphasized that the accused persons used
specific casteist slurs (“chamar”) and denied basic water
supply solely on caste grounds, which falls squarely within
the ambit of Section 3 of SC/ST Act.
d) It was argued that the pattern of discrimination extended
beyond 	the 	single 	incident, 	as 	accused 	persons 	also
prevented 	water 	tankers 	from 	supplying 	water 	to 	the
complainant’s community.
e) The counsel highlighted that multiple complaints were filed
with various authorities without any effective redressal,
necessitating judicial intervention.
f) It was submitted that constitutional rights under Articles 15,
17, and 21 have been violated, and the matter requires
summoning of accused persons, to face trial.
6. Court’s Analysis of Arguments:
a) It may be noted that while the complainant has made serious
allegations 	of 	caste-based 	discrimination, 	the 	evidence
primarily relies on testimony of complainant (CW-1) and
-- 9 of 15 --
30 Ct. Case 97/2023
VED PRAKSH
Vs.
THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI
(Vasant Kunj North)
10
one supporting witness (CW-2) from the same community.
b) It is observed that CW-3 (Prashant Verma), who was the
Delhi Jal Board official involved in the boring work, did not
support the complainant’s version and denied facing any
problems during the work.
c) The Court recognizes that in cases involving SC/ST (POA)
Act, even single witness testimony can be sufficient if
credible, 	but 	the 	absence 	of 	independent 	or 	neutral
witnesses raises questions about complete investigation.
d) The Court acknowledges the constitutional significance of
the issues raised and the need for thorough investigation to
determine the truth, especially given the serious nature of
allegations.
7. FINDINGS
After careful consideration of the complaint, documents
filed, pre-summoning evidence, and arguments, this Court
makes the following detailed findings:
Regarding Evidence and Witnesses:
a) The allegations made by the complainant (CW-1) regarding
caste-based discrimination, use of casteist slurs, and denial
of water supply on 02.06.2023 are supported only by CW-2
(Vijay Kumar), who claims to be an eye-witness to the
incident and belongs to the same caste and locality as the
-- 10 of 15 --
30 Ct. Case 97/2023
VED PRAKSH
Vs.
THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI
(Vasant Kunj North)
11
complainant.
b) CW-3 	(Prashant 	Verma), 	the 	Delhi 	Jal 	Board 	Assistant
Engineer who was directly involved in the boring work and
was stationed at Mahipal Pur during the relevant period, has
not supported the complainant’s version. His testimony
reveals:
• 	He did not face any problems during boring work
• 	He does not recollect receiving any complaints
• 	No complaints were received at his office regarding the
incident
• 	His version contradicts the allegation that Delhi Jal Board
staff faced threats
c) There is a complete absence of any independent, neutral, or
disinterested witness to corroborate the serious allegations
of 	caste-based 	abuse 	and 	discrimination 	made 	by 	the
complainant.
d) The evidence currently available is limited to testimony
from complainant and one supporting witness from the
same community, without any corroboration from neutral
sources or officials who were allegedly present during the
incident.
Regarding Investigation Requirements:
e) The current evidence presents conflicting versions - while
-- 11 of 15 --
30 Ct. Case 97/2023
VED PRAKSH
Vs.
THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI
(Vasant Kunj North)
12
complainant (CW-1) and CW-2 allege serious caste-based
discrimination and threats to Delhi Jal Board officials, CW-3
(the 	concerned 	official) 	denies 	any 	such 	problems 	or
complaints.
f) Given the serious nature of allegations under SC/ST (POA)
Act, the matter requires comprehensive investigation with
examination of all potential witnesses, particularly:
• 	Residents in the immediate vicinity of the place of
incident
• 	Other Delhi Jal Board officials who may have been
present
• 	Any other persons who may have witnessed the alleged
incident
g) The investigation should also verify the timeline of events,
the actual presence of Delhi Jal Board officials on the date,
and the sequence of events as alleged by the complainant.
h) Section 202 CrPC provides for further investigation when
evidence is insufficient to decide whether accused persons
should be summoned or not.
i) 	The interests of justice demand that all relevant witnesses
be examined before deciding on summoning of accused
persons, particularly in view of the conflicting evidence
currently available.
-- 12 of 15 --
30 Ct. Case 97/2023
VED PRAKSH
Vs.
THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI
(Vasant Kunj North)
13
FINAL ORDER
8. 	In 	light 	of 	the 	above 	detailed 	findings 	and 	considering 	the
requirements of justice, constitutional obligations, and provisions
of SC/ST (POA) Act, this Court hereby ORDERS:
Direction for Investigation:
a) 	The matter is hereby directed for further investigation
under Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to the
Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) concerned.
Scope of Investigation:
The ACP concerned shall conduct comprehensive investigation
covering the following aspects:
a) Record statements of all residents in houses and commercial
establishments located in the immediate vicinity of the
alleged place of incident.
b) Examine all Delhi Jal Board officials and staff who were
involved in the boring of borewell on 02.06.2023 (except
Prashant Verma (A.E.), who has already been examined as
CW3), particularly regarding whether any castiest remarks
were made at the time of incident.
c) Verify the exact timeline of events including:
A. 	The date and time of boring work completion
B. 	Presence of Delhi Jal Board officials on 02.06.2023
-- 13 of 15 --
30 Ct. Case 97/2023
VED PRAKSH
Vs.
THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI
(Vasant Kunj North)
14
C. 	The sequence of events as alleged by complainant
d) All statements shall be mandatorily video-recorded as per the
provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention 	of 	Atrocities) 	Act, 	1989 	and 	Rules 	framed
thereunder.
Investigation Standards:
(a) 	The ACP concerned shall ensure that:
• 	Investigation is conducted in a fair, impartial, and unbiased
manner
• 	No pressure or influence is brought to bear on any witness
Reporting Requirements:
(a) 	comprehensive 	investigation 	report 	shall 	be 	submitted
containing:
• 	Detailed statements of all witnesses examined
• 	Video recordings of all statements (in digital format)
• 	Analysis of evidence collected
• 	Assessment 	of 	complainant’s 	allegations 	based 	on
investigation
• 	Outcome of investigation
• 	Any other relevant material discovered during investigation
2. 	Timeline
a) 	The investigation shall be completed and report filed before
this Court within 60 days from the date of receipt of this
-- 14 of 15 --
30 Ct. Case 97/2023
VED PRAKSH
Vs.
THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI
(Vasant Kunj North)
15
order.
b) 	This matter is listed for consideration of investigation report
on 06th November, 2025.
3. Given the sensitive nature of the case involving caste-based
discrimination, all concerned authorities are directed to handle
the matter with utmost care, sensitivity, and in accordance with
constitutional principles and SC/ST (POA) Act provisions.
(Saurabh Partap Singh Laler)
ASJ-05, New Delhi District
Patiala House Courts, New Delhi
02.09.2025
-- 15 of 15 --