Jogender Singh @ Tiger v. Lieutenant Governor Of Delhi & ORS.

$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 1206/2020 JOGENDER SINGH @ TIGER ..... Petitioner Through Mr Surender Chauhan, Advocate versus LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR OF DELHI & ORS.

..... Respondents Through Mr Avi Singh, ASC for State with Ms Purnima Malik, Advocate.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

O R D E R

% 07.08.2020 [Hearing held through videoconferencing] CRL. M.A. 10632/2020 1.

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2.

The application is disposed of.

W.P.(CRL) 1206/2020 3.

The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, praying as under:- "a) To direct the Respondents not to interfere in life and personal liberty of the Petitioner and his family members unlawfully;

b) To take appropriate punitive action against the Respondents for violation of basic human rights and not adhering to guidelines laid down by

Hon'ble Supreme Court of India from time to time in number of Judicial Pronouncements, which are necessary to be followed before arresting a person and thereby causing immense mental and physical harassment to the Petitioner."

4.

The petitioner is admittedly involved in several cases (seventeen in number) between from the years 1999 and 2010. The details of the same have been placed on record. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was convicted in three cases and has served his sentence. He further submits that in the majority of the other cases he has been discharged/acquitted. He states that currently involved is only one case pending against him (FIR No. 0070/2010 under Section 379/356/34 IPC registered with PS. Sarai Rohilla District North). He states that despite the petitioner not being involved in any other case after 2010, he has been continuously harassed by the officials of the PS Inderpuri. He states that they visit his house regularly and are coercing him to mark his presence at the said police station. He also alleges that they have been demanding illegal gratification.

5.

Mr Avi Singh, learned ASC appearing for the state states that he has instructions that the allegations made are not correct. He states that there are also other complaints against the petitioner which are being inquired into. 6.

Considering the nature of the controversy involved in the present petition this Court considers it apposite to direct that the present petition be considered as complaint/representation by the concerned DCP ( DCP, West District). He shall ensure that the petitioner is not harassed and proceedings

against him, if any, are conducted in accordance with law. 7.

The petition is disposed of with the aforesaid directions. VIBHU BAKHRU, J AUGUST 07, 2020 pkv