Dimple Mahna v. State Of NCT Of Delhi & ORS.

$~5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 1191/2020 DIMPLE MAHNA ..... Petitioner Through petitioner in person.

versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.

..... Respondents Through Mr Rajesh Mahajan, ASC for State.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

O R D E R

% 06.08.2020 [Hearing held through videoconferencing] CRL. M.A. 10517/2020 1.

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2.

The application is disposed of.

W.P.(CRL) 1191/2020 3.

The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, praying that directions be issued to respondent nos. 1 to 3 to provide police protection to the petitioner and her family members.

4.

The petitioner states that on 24.10.2019, respondent no.4 had trespassed on the property of the petitioner and had further abused and molested her. Respondent no.4 had also warned her that she would face dire consequences. She states that an FIR No. 0489/2019 under Sections

354(D)/506 IPC was registered with PS Dwarka (South) in regard to the aforesaid incident.

5.

The petitioner further states that she has been repeatedly threatened by respondent no.4, including on 30.01.2020. On that date he had threatened that he would set an example by murdering her (Isko Aise Mot Marunga ke Duniya Yad Rakhegi). It is stated that a complaint in this regard was also registered with PS Tis Hazari Court Complex. She has also referred to an order dated 28.01.2020, where the application filed by the petitioner was disposed of. The petitioner had prayed that the Presiding Officer issue directions for filing an FIR. No such directions were issued. But the Court had observed that if the petitioner was aggrieved, she was free to file an FIR with the concerned Police Station. This Court is informed that an FIR was subsequently filed by her (FIR No. 0051/2020 under Section 506 IPC, registered with PS Dwarka South).

6.

The petitioner further states that the respondent no.4 is involved in several other cases and therefore, she apprehends risk to her life and that of her family members. She also claims that she had received a call from an anonymous number informing her that a supari (contract for killing) has been issued against her and her family members. 7.

Mr Mahajan, learned ASC points out that the petitioner has already applied for protection under the Witness Protection Scheme, 2018. The petitioner states that she has done so on 15.02.2020 but no decision has yet been taken on her application as yet.

8.

Considering the above, this Court directs the concerned Authority to

examine the petitioner's application for protection under the Witness Protection Scheme, 2018; evaluate her threat perception; and take the necessary decision as expeditiously as possible and, preferably, within a period of two week from today.

9.

In the meanwhile, respondent no.3 (SHO, PS Dwarka South) is also directed to examine the petitioner's complaint for providing protection and after evaluating her threat perception, provide such protection as he considers necessary. He shall also provide the telephone numbers of the beat staff in order to enable the petitioner to contact them in case of any eventuality.

10.

The petition is disposed of with the aforesaid directions. VIBHU BAKHRU, J AUGUST 06, 2020 pkv