Order 7

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: 40 CT Cases / 508/2024
BUNDU KHAN Vs. BUNTY /0 (Dayal Pur)
05.05.2025
Present: Ms. Jasmeen Abbass, Ld. Proxy Counsel for
complainant.
Sh Habib Ahmad, counsel for complainant through
VC.
Matter is listed for orders.
1. Brief facts of the case are that the proposed accused
persons are known to the son of the complainant namely Shakir
Hussain. Son of the complainant indulged in some illegal activities
and complainant has already disowned her son vide public notice
dated 30.04.2024. Proposed accused persons frequently visit the
house of the complainant, quarrel with the complainant and his
family members and they have also threatened to implicate the
complainant in false criminal cases. On 20.04.2024, proposed
accused persons came to complainant’s house and threatened to kill
him if he did not give them Rs. 50,000/- and accordingly
complainant gave Rs. 50,000/- to proposed accused persons. While
leaving complainant’s house, proposed accused persons demanded
another sum of Rs. 5 lacs and threatned the complainant with dire
consequences if he did not pay the same. On 25.04.2024, proposed
accused persons came to the shop of the son of the complainant and
again threatened the son of the complainant. On 13.05.2024,
proposed accused persons and their associates came to shop of
complainant, manhandled the complainant, threatened to kill him
and his son if he did not pay Rs. 5 lacs. Being aggrieved,
complainant made a complaint to SHO PS Dayalpur on 29.04.2024
-- 1 of 3 --
and to the higher authorities i.e. DCP on 16.05.2024 but despite
that, no steps were taken by the concerned police officials.
Complainant accordingly prays for registration of FIR against
proposed accused persons U/s 323/341/384/504/506 IPC.
2. ATR was filed by the IO. As per the ATR, no
cognizable offence is made out.
3. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the
contentions of the complainant and have gone through the record as
well as perused the report.
4. From the perusal of the facts of the present complaint,
material on record and after hearing the submissions of Ld.
Counsel for the complainant, there appears to be no need to invoke
Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C for issuing directions to register FIR against
the proposed accused persons. It is clear that the identity of the
alleged accused persons is ascertained and known to the
complainant. No facts need to be unearthed as all the facts and
circumstances of the case also appear to be within the knowledge
of the complainant. The evidence is well within the reach of the
complainant and no assistance of police is required to gather the
same. Further, the custodial interrogation of the alleged accused
persons is not necessary and the facts of the case are not such that
would warrant a detailed and complex investigations to be carried
out by the State Agency. Thus, in the facts of the present case, I do
not consider it fit to order for registration of FIR. The application
U/s 156 (3) Cr.P.C is hereby dismissed. The complainant is
however at liberty to proceed with his complaint U/s 200 Cr.P.C
and to lead pre-summoning evidence. It may be noted that in case
-- 2 of 3 --
any police enquiry is deemed necessary at a later stage, recourse to
Section 202 Cr.P.C can be taken at that stage.
Put up for PSE on 15/10/2025.
(Dhanashree Deka)
ACJM/NE/KKD Courts
05.05.2025
-- 3 of 3 --