Final Order 4

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: 31CT Cases 430/2025
Sadhna Gupta Vs. State NCT of Delhi
PS Jyoti Nagar, 21.08.2025
Present: Sh. Arun Kumar Mavi, Ld. APP for the State.
Ms. Sushila, Ld. Counsel for the complainant.
1. Matter is listed for orders on application u/s 175(3) of BNSS.
2. Submissions have already been heard. Record perused.
3. Briefly stated, the allegations of the complainant are that the
complainant is the absolute owner and in possession of the Plot No. 19,
(block No. A, Plot No. 19) area ad-measuring 200 Sq. Yards, Kailash
Nagar colony, Loni Road, Shahdara, Delhi, forming part of the Khasra
No. 853, 854, 855, 861, 862, 863, 864, 1017/865, 866, 875, 876, 877, 878,
879, 1132-22/892 (referred hereinafter the ‘PIQ’). Thereafter, on
14.10.1997 the sale-deed was executed by M/s G S Kashyap & Son
(HUF) M/s Capital Land Builders Pvt. Ltd. being the Vendors in favour of
Sh. Tilak Raj Mehra in respect to PIQ vide document No. 3109 in book
No. V, Volume no. 2993 on pages 152-158 dt. 20.10.1997 at the office of
Sub Registrar IV, Seelampur Delhi and further that on 24.10.1997 Sh.
Tilak Raj Mehra sold the PIQ to Smt. Sarla Gupta, W/o Subhash Chand
Gupta vide sale dt. 31.10.1997 vide document no. 3155 in book no. V
Volume no. 2994 on pages 175-178 at the office of Sub Registrar IV,
Seelampur, Delhi. Complainant further stated that on 26.03.2010 Smt.
Sarla Gupta executed the irrevocable General Power of Attorney in favour
of him vide registered GPA dt. 26.03.2010. The said irrevocable GPA was
duly registered in the office of Sub Registrar IVA, Shahdara, Delhi. That
from the perusal of the above said documents, it is clear that complianant
is the lawful attorney holder of the PIQ and is physical possession of the
PIQ since then. That the above said persons with criminal intention to
grab the PIQ tresspassed his property on 22.03.2025 with the local goons
and land mafia of the area. It is pertinent to mention that M/s Samarth
Security Pvt. Ltd. is hired by M/s Capital Land Builders Pvt. Ltd. and M/s
Runwell India Pvt. Ltd. for the purpose of care taking the other plots
-- 1 of 5 --
belonging to the above said companies. Thus, on 22.03.2025 one person
Mr. Samarth called at phone no. 112 when he saw the accused person with
the other goons of the area at his plot and thereafter, the accused person
fled from the spot after seeing the police. After that, the complainant have
been living under constant fear as the accused person can go to any extent
to grab his PIQ and has been threatening him of dire consequences.
Thereafter, from the perusal of the abovesaid documents, it is clear
that the above land is an approved colony and the complainant is the
absolute and in physical possession of the said land. That sometime in
2018, some persons namely, Shiv Kumar Jindal and members of the
family started making fake claims over the land which once belonged to
their forefathers on the basis of some old revenue record.
As per the complainant, despite her complaints made to senior police
officials including SHO and DCP, no action has been taken on her
complaint. Thus, she has moved the present application seeking
registration of FIR.
4. Upon the application of complainant u/s 175(3) BNSS made to this
Court, Action Taken Report was called from PS Jyoti Nagar. As per the
report, dated 14.05.2025, it was concluded that civil cases ar pending
between Shiv Kumar Jindand Vs. Capital Land Builders Pvt. Ltd. before
the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi and further complainant Sadhna Gupta
through statement stated that plot no. A-19, Kailash Nagar Colony, Loni
Road was not in possession of anyone and is a vacant plot. Hence no
cognizable offence has been made out.
5. This Court has given thoughtful consideration to the contentions of
the complainant and has gone through the record. The law related to
Section 175(3) of BNSS is same as to law regarding Section u/s 156(3)
Cr.P.C.
5.1 The Law in respect of application U/s 156(3) Cr.PC is well settled.
In the case of Gulab Chand Upadhyay Vs. State of UP. 2002 Crl. LJ
-- 2 of 5 --
2907, it has been held as under:
“the scheme of Cr.P.C and the prevailing circumstances require that the option
to direct the registration of the case and its investigation by the police should
be exercised where some “investigation” is required, which is of a nature that
is not possible for the private complainant, and which can only be done by the
police upon whom statute has conferred the powers essential for investigation.
But where the complainant is in possession of the complete details of all the
accused as well as the witnesses who have to be examined and neither recovery
is needed nor any such material evidence is required to be collected which can
be done only by the police, no “investigation” would normally be required and
the procedure of complaint case should be adopted”.
5.2 In M/s. Skipper Beverages Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State 2001 IV AD
(Delhi), it was held that:
“It is true that Section 156(3) of the Code empowers to Magistrate to direct the
police to register a case and initiate investigations but this power has to be
exercised judiciously on proper grounds and not in a mechanical manner. In
those cases where the allegations are not very serious and complaint himself is
in possession of evidence to prove his allegations there should be no need to
pass orders U/s. 156 (3) of the Code. This discretion ought to be exercised after
proper application of mind and only in those cases where the Magistrate is of
the view that the nature of the allegations is such that the complainant himself
may not be in a position to collect and produce evidence before the court and
interest of justice demand that the police should step in the help of the
complaint.”
5.3 The court is supposed to order investigation keeping in mind
the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Subh
Karan Luharuka & anr Vs. State & anr 2010(3) JCC 1972, where it is
laid down as under:
“52A. For the guidance of Subordinate Courts, the procedure to be followed
while dealing with an application U/s 156 (3) of the Code is summarized as
under:
(i) Whenever a Magistrate is called upon to pass orders under Sec 156 (3) of
-- 3 of 5 --
the code, at the outset, the Magistrate should ensure that before coming to the
Court, the complainant did approach the police officer in charge of the Police
of Station having jurisdiction over the area for recording the information
available with him disclosing the commission of a cognizable offence by the
persons/persons arrayed as an accused in the complaint. It should also be
examined as to what action was taken by the SHO, or even by the senior officer
of the Police, when approached by the complainant under Section 154 (3) of the
Code.
(ii) The Magistrate should then form his own opinion whether the facts
mentioned in the complaint disclose commission of cognizable offence by the
accused persons arrayed in the complaint which can be tried in his jurisdiction.
He should also satisfy himself about the need for investigation by the police in
the matter. A preliminary enquiry as this is permissible even by an SHO and if
no such enquiry has been done by the SHO, then it is all the more necessary for
the Magistrate to consider all these factors. For that purpose, the Magistrate
must apply his mind and such application of mind should be reflected in the
Order passed by him.Upon a preliminary satisfaction, unless there are
exceptional circumstances to be recorded in writing, a status report by the
police is to be called for before passing final orders.
(iii) The Magistrate when approached with a complaint under Section 200 134
of the Code, should invariably proceed under Chapter XV by taking cognizance
of the complaint, recording evidence and then deciding the question of issuance
of process to the accused. In that case also, the Magistrate is fully entitled to
postpone the process if it is felt that there is a necessity to call for a police
report under Section 202 of the Code.
(iv) Of course, it is open to the Magistrate to proceed under Chapter XII of the
Code when an application under Section 156 (3) of the Code is also filed
alongwith a complaint U/s 200 of the Code if the Magistrate decides not to take
cognizance of the complaint. However, in that case, the Magistrate, before
passing any order to proceed under Chapter XII, should not only satisfy himself
about the pre requisites as aforesaid, but, additionally, he should also be
satisfied that it is necessary to direct Police investigation in the matter for
-- 4 of 5 --
collection of evidence which is neither in the possession of the complainant nor
can be produced by the witnesses on being summoned by the Court at the
instance of the complainant, and the matter is such which calls for investigation
by a State agency. The Magistrate must pass an order giving cogent reasons as
to why he intends to proceed under Chapter XII instead of Chapter XV of the
Code.”
6. In the light of the facts and circumstances of the present
complaint and in view of the law discussed above there is no need to
invoke section 175(3)of BNSS for issuing direction for registration of FIR
against the respondents as:
A. The identity of alleged accused persons are ascertained.
B. No facts are needed to be unearthed as the same are well
within the knowledge of the complainant.
C. Custodial interrogation of alleged accused persons are not
necessary.
D. The evidence is well within the reach of complainant & no
assistance of police is required to gather the same.
E. The facts of the case are not such that would warrant a
detailed and complex investigations to be carried out by the State
Agency.
7. It is also noticeable that the court may issue summons to any
relevant witness/person/authority at the instance of Complainant for
bringing on record full facts and material pertaining to the incident in
question. Hence, there is no need for investigation by the police u/s 175(3)
BNSS in this case. In view of this, the present application of u/s 175(3)
BNSS. is dismissed.
File be consigned to record room after all necessary
compliance.
(RAHUL SAINI)
JMFC-08/Shahdara Distt.
KKD Courts,Delhi/21.08.2025
-- 5 of 5 --