Sukhjeet Singh v. The State (Govt. Of NCT Of Delhi) & ORS.

$~30 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 3034/2023 SUKHJEET SINGH .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Aditya Ranjan, Advocate versus THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) & ORS.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr. Nawal Kishore Jha, APP for State

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI

O R D E R

% 16.07.2024 1.

By way of present petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of the FIR No.374/2021 registered under Sections 304A/279 IPC at PS Mayapuri, Delhi, solely on the ground that though it is stated in the FIR that the deceased while riding a motorbike has collided with a Maruti Ritz car bearing registration number HR-51AH-2597, however, along with the charge-sheet, the investigating agency has also filed a CCTV footage/video which indicates otherwise.

2.

Learned APP for the State on the other hand has opposed the petition by contending that in the present case the petitioner is the contractor for valet parking. During investigation, the statement of the owner of the car namely Eric Charles has been recorded who had stated that on the day of the incident, he had handed over his white car bearing aforesaid number to the valet for parking. Further, the IO has also seized the parking token. The car given to valet parking was also mechanically inspected and a mechanical The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 09:46:41

inspection report was filed along with the charge-sheet showing damage to the car on the rear side. The car owner has also identified the said car. 3.

During the course of submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the CCTV footage. I have examined the CCTV footage. On a prima facie viewing of the CCTV footage, neither any number is reflected, nor it can be determined if it is the same car or some other car. It is left open to the petitioner to establish this contention during trial. 4.

In view of the above, I find no ground to entertain the present petition and the same is accordingly dismissed.

5.

Needless to state that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and have made the observations only with regard to present petition. Nothing observed hereinabove shall amount to an expression on the merits of the case and shall not have a bearing on the trial of the case.

MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J JULY 16, 2024/rd The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/07/2025 at 09:46:41