IN THE COURT OF THE LD. C.M.
M SAKET COURTS COURTS, NEW
DELHI
APPLICATION NO _______2024
IN THE MATTER OF:
QUBIK INFRA PVT. LTD ...COMPLAINANT/APPLICANT
VERSUS
AK ENTERPRISES & Ors. ...ACCUSED PERSONS
INDEX
[Link]. PARTICULAR PAGES
1. MEMO OF PARTIES.
2. APPLICATION U/S 156(3) [Link], 1973 ALONG WITH
SUPPORTING AFFIDAVITS.
3. LIST OF DOCUMENTS
4. CERTIFICATE U/S 65B OF EVIDENCE ACT, 1872
5. VAKALATNAMA.
APPLICANT
THROUGH COUNSELS
Place: New Delhi
Date:
IN THE COURT OF THE LD. C.M.M SAKET COURTS COURTS, NEW
DELHI
APPLICATION NO _______2024
IN THE MATTER OF:
QUBIK INFRA PVT. LTD ...COMPLAINANT/APPLICANT
VERSUS
AK ENTERPRISES & Ors. ...ACCUSED PERSONS
P.S. HAUZ KHAS
MEMO OF PARTIES
IN THE MATTER OF:
1. QUBIK INFRA PVT. LTD.(Through its director)
B-18, THIRD FLOOR PANCHSHEEL ENCLAVE,
NEW DELHI-110017
…COMPLAINANT/APPLICANT
VERSUS
1. AK ENTERPRISES
THROUGH PROPREITOR, MD RAMIZ RAZA
H NO-1, LOWER GROUND FLOOR,
FATEHPUR BERI, CHOTT BHATI,
NEAR SAWAN PUBLIC SCHOOL,
NEW DELHI-110074
2. MD RAMIZ RAZA
PROPRIETOR, A K ENTERPRISES
H NO-1, LOWER GROUND FLOOR,
FATEHPUR BERI, CHOTT BHATT,
NEAR SAWAN PUBLIC SCHOOL,
NEW DELHI-110074
…ACCUSED PERSONS
APPLICANT
THROUGH COUNSELS
Place: New Delhi
Date:
IN THE COURT OF THE LD. C.M.M SAKET COURTS COURTS, NEW
DELHI
APPLICATION NO _______2024
IN THE MATTER OF:
QUBIK INFRA PVT. LTD ...COMPLAINANT/APPLICANT
VERSUS
AK ENTERPRISES & Ors. ...ACCUSED PERSONS
P.S. HAUZ KHAS
APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 156(3) OF THE CODE OF
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, 1973 SEEKING FOR DIRECTIONS
TO THE POLICE AUTHORITIES TO REGISTER A FIR UNDER
SECTIONS 406, 420, 441, 467 and 120-B OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE
AND TO FURTHER INVESTIGATE THE MATTER IN ACCORDANCE
WITH LAW
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
1. That the Applicant is a law abiding citizens of India and permanently residing at
House no. G-102, Jhulelal Apartment Pitam Pura, Delhi-110034
2. That the Applicant has been constrained to file the instant application before
this Hon’ble Court as despite his several written complaints to the Police
authorities disclosing the cognizable offence, the Police has failed to register an
FIR on the complaint of the Applicant.
3. That the brief facts for filing the instant application are:
a) That complainant is the widow of late Sh. Anil Juneja and residing at
House no. G-102, Jhulelal Apartment Pitam Pura, Delhi-110034. The
copy of the aaddhar card of the complainant/ applicant is annexed
herewith as Annexure C1.
b) That my husband Late Sh. Anil Juneja and one Sh. Subhash Chander
S/o Late Sh. R.L. Dhamija were the joint tenants and in possession of
shop No. 4609/253, Cloth Market, Church Mission Road, Chandni
Chowk, Delhi under the tenancy of Delhi Cloth Market Trust
Committee 4048, Mahavir Bazar, Cloths Mkt., Church Mission Road,
Delhi-6. The copy of the rent receipt issued by the Delhi Cloth market
trust Committee and the Electricity bill of the said premises is annexed
herewith as ANNEXURE C2(COLLY).
c) That the complainant husband and Sh. Subhash Chander were running
the business of clothes and Dairies in partnership in the above said shop.
Sh. Subhash Chander retired from partnership since long and only my
husband was looking after, managing and running the business of the
firm.
d) That my husband went out of India for his business purposes and asked
my brother in law Shyam Juneja to look after, manage, and control the
business on his behalf, in the said shop till his return from abroad. My
husband handed over the shop full of clothes and Dairies to above said
Shyam Juneja who started managing and running the said shop on
behalf of my husband Late Sh. Anil Juneja and said Shyam Juneja
giving profits to my late husband.
e) That when my husband late Sh. Anil Juneja returned to India from
abroad he went to his above said shop and asked Shyam Juneja to give
the sale consideration of the goods, wherein Shyam Juneja told my
husband that he will not give anything. Than the above said Shyam
Juneja became furious and started abusing my husband, refused to give
the amount of sale, threatened to kill my husband and refused to hand-
over the possession of shop alleging (now the tenancy of the shop is in
my (Shyam Juneja) and name of my wife's Smt. Yogita Juneja").
f) That thereafter, I and my husband went to the office of Delhi Cloth
Market Trust Committee and on inquiry came to know that said Shyam
Juneja submitted the forged and fabricated NOC purportedly and
allegedly issued by my husband and Shyam Juneja got transferred the
said shop in joint names of him and his wife Yogita Juneja. The copy of
the Forged and fabricated NOC submitted by Shyam Juneja is Annexed
herewith as ANNEXURE C3.
g) That it is submitted herein that my husband did not give any NOC in
favour of Shyam Juneja and Yogita Juneja in respect of the said shop
and he (Shyam Juneja) and his wife have played a fraud with my
husband. It is further submitted that my husband was not in india in the
year and date on which the NOC was executed, the copy of the passport
along with immigration stamp is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE C4.
h) That Sh. Shyam Juneja on the basis of forged and fabricated NOC etc.
got the shop of my husband transferred in his name and wife Yogita
Juneja malafifiedly and illegally is in possession occupation of the shop
of my husband and Sh. Shyam Juneja and his wife Yogita Juneja and
have misappropriated the goods lying in the shop and sale proceeds etc.
of clothes and Daries. My husband was out of India on the date of issue
alleged NOC. Sh. Shyam Juneja and his wife Yogita Juneja has caused
wrongful loss to my husband and my family and wrongful gain to him.
That Sh. Shyam Juneja and his wife are now trespasser in the said shop
and his possession unauthorized and illegally.
a) That it was after this the Applicant contacted their lawyers and proceeded to
investigate and thereon filed complaints with the concerned authorities,
immediately.
The Applicant with information thereof has been duly received since
December 12, 2020 by the offices of:
i. SHO LAHORI GATE police station on 08.02.2022 vide Dairy
No. 30A,
ii. DCP, NORTH, ON 02.01.2024 vide email and speed post vide
Diary No. 14792.
i) That a bare perusal of the contents of the complaints would show that a
prima-facie case for commission of cognizable offence has been committed
attracting the sections require to register an FIR under Section 406,420,441,
467, 465 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code.
j) That therefore it is evident that the instant case requires a thorough
investigation by the Police.
k) That the Police has been in gross violation of the law as laid down by the
Hon’ble Apex Court in the matter of Lalita Kumari vs. State of U.P
wherein it has been held as follows:
“110. Therefore, in view of various counter claims regarding registration
or non-registration, what is necessary is only that the information given to
the police must disclose the commission of a cognizable offence. In such a
situation, registration of an FIR is mandatory. However, if no cognizable
offence is made out in the information given, then the FIR need not be
registered immediately and perhaps the police can conduct a sort of
preliminary verification or inquiry for the limited purpose of ascertaining
as to whether a cognizable offence has been committed. But, if the
information given clearly mentions the commission of a cognizable offence,
there is no other option but to register an FIR forthwith. Other
considerations are not relevant at the stage of registration of FIR, such as,
whether the information is falsely given, whether the information is genuine,
whether the information is credible etc. These are the issues that have to be
verified during the investigation of the FIR. At the stage of registration of
FIR, what is to be seen is merely whether the information given ex facie
discloses the commission of a cognizable offence. If, after investigation, the
information given is found to be false, there is always an option to
prosecute the complainant for filing a false FIR.
Conclusion/Directions:
111. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we hold:
(i) Registration of FIR is mandatory under Section 154 of the Code, if the
information discloses commission of a cognizable offence and no
preliminary inquiry is permissible in such a situation.
(ii) If the information received does not disclose a cognizable offence but
indicates the necessity for an inquiry, a preliminary inquiry may be
conducted only to ascertain whether cognizable offence is disclosed or not.
(iii) If the inquiry discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, the FIR
must be registered. In cases where preliminary inquiry ends in closing the
complaint, a copy of the entry of such closure must be supplied to the first
informant forthwith and not later than one week. It must disclose reasons in
brief for closing the complaint and not proceeding further.
(iv) The police officer cannot avoid his duty of registering offence if
cognizable offence is disclosed. Action must be taken against erring officers
who do not register the FIR if information received by him discloses a
cognizable offence.
(v) The scope of preliminary inquiry is not to verify the veracity or
otherwise of the information received but only to ascertain whether the
information reveals any cognizable offence.
(vi) As to what type and in which cases preliminary inquiry is to be
conducted will depend on the facts and circumstances of each case. The
category of cases in which preliminary inquiry may be made are as under:
(a) Matrimonial disputes/family disputes
(b) Commercial offences
(c) Medical negligence cases
(d) Corruption cases
(e) Cases where there is abnormal delay/laches in initiating criminal
prosecution, for example, over 3 months delay in reporting the matter
without satisfactorily explaining the reasons for delay.
The aforesaid are only illustrations and not exhaustive of all conditions
which may warrant preliminary inquiry.
(vii) While ensuring and protecting the rights of the accused and the
complainant, a preliminary inquiry should be made time bound and in any
case it should not exceed fifteen days generally and in exceptional cases, by
giving adequate reasons, six weeks time is provided. The fact of such delay
and the causes of it must be reflected in the General Diary entry.
(viii) Since the General Diary/Station Diary/Daily Diary is the record of all
information received in a police station, we direct that all information
relating to cognizable offences, whether resulting in registration of FIR or
leading to an inquiry, must be mandatorily and meticulously reflected in the
said Diary and the decision to conduct a preliminary inquiry must also be
reflected, as mentioned above.
112. With the above directions, we dispose of the reference made to us. List
all the matters before the appropriate Bench for disposal on merits.”
l) That compliance u/s 154 of CrPC has been done and still no action had been
done taken by the Police Authority. That from the conduct of the police
officials, it appears that the police officials are hands in gloves with the
accused and they in connivance with the Accused Persons, conceal facts and
made wrong and incorrect submission in the status report and did not take
any action against the other Accused Persons for the reason best known to
them.
m) That the Applicant is making the present application against the Accused
Persons for the offence committed by them in collusion and conspiracy with
each other.
n) That the Applicant respectfully submits that unless and until immediate
directions for investigation and registration of FIR with immediate effect
are given, the Accused Persons will make complete mockery of the due
process of law and will also harm the Complainant property.
o) That the instant application is being made bonafide and the interest of
justice and grave prejudice will be caused to the applicant if the same is not
allowed.
p) That the Applicant undertakes to provide any/all the assistance that may be
required by the investigating agency that the applicant has not filed any
other/similar application before any other Court.
q) Under this Circumstances, the Applicant Prays for legal action against the
Accused.
r) That the cause of action and property in question is fallen in the area of this
Hon'ble Court hence this Hon'ble Court has jurisdiction to try and entertain
this application in accordance with law.
PRAYER
In light of the above mentioned it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble
Court may be pleased to:
1. Allow the instant application and direct the SHO, Police Station Lahori Gate to
register an FIR under Sections 406,420,441, 467 And 120-B of The Indian
Penal Code in the instant case and thoroughly investigate the matter in
accordance with law;
2. Pass any other order(s) as this Hon’ble Court deems fit.
AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS, THE HUMBLE APPLICANT AS IN
DUTY BOUND, SHALL EVER PRAY.
APPLICANT
THROUGH COUNSELS
Place: New Delhi
Date:
IN THE COURT OF THE LD. C.M.M SAKET COURTS COURTS,
NEW DELHI
APPLICATION NO _______2024
IN THE MATTER OF:
QUBIK INFRA PVT. LTD ...COMPLAINANT/APPLICANT
VERSUS
AK ENTERPRISES & Ors. ...ACCUSED PERSONS
AFFIDAVIT
I, , do hereby solemnly
affirm and declare as under:
1. That I am the Applicant in the above noted complaint and fully conversant
with the fact and circumstance of the case and also have personal
knowledge of the facts of the case, hence competent to swear this affidavit.
2. That the accompanying Application U/S 156(3) of Cr.P.C., 1973 has been
drafted by my counsel under my instructions, the contents of which have
been read by me, the same are true and correct and may be read as part of
this affidavit as the same are not being repeated herein for the same of
brevity.
Deponent
Verification
Verified at New Delhi on this day of 2024 , that the
contents of my above affidavit are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge and nothing is concealed there from.
Deponent
IN THE COURT OF THE LD. C.M.M SAKET COURTS COURTS, NEW DELHI
APPLICATION NO _______2024
IN THE MATTER OF:
QUBIK INFRA PVT. LTD ...COMPLAINANT/APPLICANT
VERSUS
AK ENTERPRISES & Ors. ...ACCUSED PERSONS
LIST OF DOCUMENTS
[Link]. PARTICULAR PAGES
1. VAKALATNAMA.
APPLICANT
THROUGH COUNSELS
Place: New Delhi
Date:
IN THE COURT OF THE LD. C.M.M SAKET COURTS COURTS, NEW DELHI
APPLICATION NO _______2024
IN THE MATTER OF:
QUBIK INFRA PVT. LTD ...COMPLAINANT/APPLICANT
VERSUS
AK ENTERPRISES & Ors. ...ACCUSED PERSONS
P.S. HAUZ KHAS
CERTIFICATE U/S 65 B (4)(a) of the Evidence Act, 1872
This is to certify that the contents of the documents annexed along this Application in the list
of documents some of which being Computer Output(s)/Electronic Record(s) i.e. (i.) Email
correspondences to [cmdelhi@[Link]]; (ii.) Computer Print outs of the delivery reports of the
speed post and courier send to the Accused. These being relevant for the proper disposal of
the present matter have been given on record before this Hon’ble Court from the aforesaid
Email ID and Websites etc. were obtained by me using my personal working Computer,
which is well maintained by me and is safe, secure and in good working condition after
taking printouts by me, which are true and correct documents to the best of my knowledge
and nothing material has been withheld and/or altered there from.
That, I hereby, further under take to provide/abide by any directions from this Hon’ble Court
to satisfy all conditions of law, if required by this Hon’ble Court, per law.
Sincerely yours,
DATED:
PLACE: New Delhi
