Interim Order 15

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: 45 Cr Cases 10248/2022 STATE Vs. DINESH AND ORS.
000245/2022 (Sarojini Nagar)
23.12.2025
Present: Sh. Bhanu Pratap Singh, Ld. Addl. PP for the State.
Accused Dinesh, Bimlesh and Ravinder with Ld. LAC B.K. Tomar.
Arguments heard.
Ld. Counsel for accused persons has argued that the accused be
discharged as there is nothing on record to show the involvement of the accused
persons.
Per contra, Ld. APP has argued that prima facie the offence appears
to be committed by the accused persons and hence, charges be framed against
the accused persons. Heard. Record perused.
It is settled law that no mini trial is required to be conducted at the
stage of consideration on charge. Reliance is placed on
State of T.N. v. N.
Suresh Ranjan (2014) 11 SCC 709. Further, even if unexplained grave suspicion
is made out against the accused from material on record, the court is
empowered to frame charges as has been observed in the case of
State (Nct of
Delhi) v. Shiv Charan (2020) 2 SCC 290. In the instant case, the defence of the
accused is not relevant at this stage and the same will be considered during the
trial as has also been observed in the case of
State of Orissa v. Debendra Nath
Padhi (2005) 1 SCC 568.
Accordingly, prima facie an offence punishable under Section
380/454/411/34 IPC appears to be committed by the accused persons.
A separate charge has been framed to which the accused presons
plead not guilty and claims to be tried. Let summons be issued to complainant
and MHCM with case property for PE on 05.05.2026.
(Vijayshree Rathore)
JMFC-05/PHC/ND
23.12.2025
-- 1 of 1 --