Order 4

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: IN THE COURT OF MS. GARIMA JINDAL,
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS-06,NORTH, ROHINI
COURTS, DELHI
Item no. 56
Ct. Cases 293/2024
NEERAJ SHARMA Vs. GEETA
14.10.2024
O R D E R
Vide this order, I shall decide the application u/s 156 (3) Cr.PC. The
facts of the complaint, in brief are that accused no. 1 and 2 are known to the
complainant and they had taken a friendly loan of Rs. 70,000/- from the
complainant, in the first week of November 2020. The loan was to be repaid
on or before 01.10.2023, however, the accused persons failed to repay the
loan. On 04.10.2023, the complainant visited the house of accused no.1 and
2 where accused no. 3 and 4 were also present. It is the case of the
complainant that when she demanded the refund of the loan amount,
accused no. 1 to 4 started threatening and intimidating the complainant,
gave her vulgar threats and abuses and slapped and punched the
complainant on her chest. They also threatened the complainant with false
criminal cases. It is the case of the complainant that out of fear and stress,
she came back and she was so scared that she could not report the matter to
the police.
After encourage of her family members, the complainant lodged the
complaint with SHO PS Adarsh Nagar, however, no action was taken on her
complaint and hence, the present case has been filed by her.
ATR was filed under the signatures of SI Garima, wherein, it is
stated that proposed accused Satyawan was called to the PS, wherein he
denied the allegations. A perusal of the statement of the proposed accused
Satyawan reveals that the complainant had threatened him to file a false
case against him qua outraging her modesty. It is further stated by the
-- 1 of 2 --
proposed accused Satyawan that he had taken one committee from the
complainant, however, the money was not released in his favour. He further
stated that he had not taken any loan from the complainant and the
complainant is harassing him for returning the said amount, despite the
committee not having been released in his favour. It is further stated in the
ATR that alleged Satyawan had also filed an application u/s 200 of Cr.PC
against the complainant herein- Neerja, which was dismissed.
Heard. Record perused.
It appears that dispute between the parties is civil in nature
and the present complaint has been filed by the complainant just to exert
undue pressure on the accused and the complainant by way of present
complaint is trying to give it the color of criminal offence which can not be
allowed by this court to serve her vested interest. It is the admitted case of
the complainant that she has visited the house of the accused persons for
recovery of loan amount. In view of the above discussion, prima facie no
case is made out against the accused persons which requires investigation by
police to unearth the truth. Moreover, the facts as alleged by the
complainant are within the knowledge of complainant which can be proved
either by himself or through summoned witnesses who can testify to his
allegations against the accused persons. Thus, in view of the above, the
court is not inclined to use the discretion vested in the court u/s 156(3)
Cr.P.C in favour of the applicant/complainant.
Thus, the present application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. is hereby
dismissed.
(Garima Jindal)
Judicial Magistrate First Class-06
North District
Rohini Courts,Delhi/
14.10.2024
-- 2 of 2 --