VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Delhi High Court 2024 › High Court of Delhi

Niwas Nikam v. The State Gnct of Delhi

Court
High Court of Delhi
Decided
6 November 2024
Bench
Anish Dayalauthor
Case no.
W.P.(CRL) 3457/2024

Follow Delhi High CourtFollow Anish Dayal

Judgment

O R D E R %

06.11.2024

¶1This petition is filed for setting aside order dated 15th October 2024 passed by JMFC-08, South-West, Dwarka, New Delhi in FIR No.276/2011 under Sections 380 IPC at PS Uttam Nagar. Charge sheet was filed under Section 380/454/411/34 IPC. Vide the impugned order, application filed by petitioner for cancellation of proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C. qua him, was dismissed.

¶2Counsel for petitioner points out that the FIR was registered in 2011, charge sheet filed in 2016, and petitioner appeared before the Trial Court till 25th February 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic. Till then, he was working in a jewellery shop in Najafgarh and, therefore, address of Najafgarh had been provided. Thereafter, he went back to his native residence in Maharashtra and, therefore, was not apprised of the This is a digitally signed order. proceedings post-pandemic.

¶3Notices having been served on Najafgarh address, returned unserved and, therefore, Non-Bailable Warrants were issued, followed by initiation of proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C. on 4th November 2023. Statement of Process Server also shows that the process was served at the Najafgarh address.

¶4In these circumstances, the Court is inclined to allow the petition. Accordingly, proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C. are set aside.

¶5Counsel for petitioner, on instructions, states that petitioner will appear before the Trial Court on 13th November 2024.

¶6Counsel for petitioner draws attention to order dated 6th August 2024 whereby notices were issued to surety to appear on the next date of hearing; on 15th October 2024, accused appeared before the Court through VC along with his surety who appeared in person before the Court. The JMFC noted that bail bonds were already forfeited since he had not appeared physically in the Court.

¶7In this view of the matter and directions passed above, it is directed that in the event bail bonds are not forfeited, the same shall continue, otherwise the petitioner shall file fresh bail bond and surety bond.

¶8Additionally, petitioner shall supply his fresh address and contact number to the Trial Court.

¶9Petition stands disposed of with above directions.

¶10Pending applications are disposed of as infructuous.

¶11Order be uploaded on the website of this Court. ANISH DAYAL, J NOVEMBER 6, 2024/sm/sc This is a digitally signed order.

Case details

Parties and counsel

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 3457/2024 CRL.M.A. 33239/2024 CRL.M.A. 33240/2024 NIWAS NIKAM .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Keshav Sharma, Mr. Rishabh Kumar, Mr. Rohit Rana, Advs. versus THE STATE GNCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Ms. Rupali Bandhopadhyay, ASC (GNCTD) with Mr. Abhijeet Kumar, Adv. SI Bharat Singh PS Uttam Nagar CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL

Source: High Court of Delhi, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.