Karuna Makker v. State NCT Of Delhi

$~36 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CRL.M.C. 2159/2025 KARUNA MAKKER .....Petitioner Through:

Mr.

Karan Suneja, Advocate.

versus STATE NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through:

Mr. Pradeep Gahlot, APP for the State with SI Sidharth, PS Hauz Khas.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN

O R D E R

% 01.04.2025 CRL.M.A. 9706/2025 (Exemption) 1.

Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. 2.

The application stands disposed of.

CRL.M.C. 2159/2025 3.

The present petition has been filed seeking expeditious conclusion of trial in FIR 441/2013 dated 09.10.2023, under Sections 467/468/471/120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('IPC') registered at Police Station Hauz Khas. 4.

The FIR was registered at the instance of two complainants namely- Sh. Narendra Mehta and the present petitioner. Chargesheet has been filed and charges were framed by the learned Trial Court vide order dated 26.09.2017 under Sections 467/471/120B of the IPC.

5.

The petitioner is aggrieved by the long pendency of the proceedings in the present FIR. The record indicates that from 2018 to 2024 the matter could not proceed since the accused persons had challenged the order framing charges before this 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 04/04/2025 at 13:55:35

Court being CRL.M.C. 4158/2018. The order framing charges was also challenged by one of the complainants, namely- Sh. Narendra Mehta in a Revision Petition bearing No. Crl Rev. P 157/2018.

6.

The petition before this Court was decided by order dated 20.08.2024. This Court allowed CRL.M.C. 4158/2018 and set aside the order framing charges against two of the accused persons and discharged them of the offences under Sections 467/471/120B of the IPC. The complainant was also given liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings in Civil Court in regard to the disputes.

7.

The learned Trial Court not proceeding during the pendency of the petition before this Court cannot be faulted. The matter was thereafter listed before the learned Trial Court on 26.11.2024 and on that date, the record indicates that adjournment was sought by one of the complainants. The matter was adjourned to 23.12.2024, on which date, the learned counsel for the accused persons stated that settlement talks are going on between the parties to which the other complainant stated that they have been approached in regard to the same. On the next date of hearing i.e., 18.02.2025, the matter was adjourned to 07.04.2025.

8.

The record does not indicate that the trial has been delayed for any unjustifiable reason.

9.

In view of the above, this Court does not find it apposite to pass any directions.

10.

The petition is therefore dismissed.

AMIT MAHAJAN, J APRIL 1, 2025 DU 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 04/04/2025 at 13:55:36