M/S Nipun Embroidery v. Delhi Police & ORS.

$~71 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 2608/2019 M/S NIPUN EMBROIDERY ..... Petitioner Through Mr Mohan Kumar, Advocate.

versus DELHI POLICE & ORS.

..... Respondent Through Ms Nandita Rao, ASC - GNCTD for R1 and R4.

Ms Sarika Singh, Advocate, Govt. Counsel for R2. Insp. M.P. Singh, P.S. C.R. Park.

Mr Prasanta Varma, SPP CBI with Ms Chetna, Advocates for R3.

Mr Manish Sharma, Advocate for R5.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

O R D E R

% 16.09.2019 1.

The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, praying that directions be issued to respondent nos. 1 to 5 to lodge an FIR and to issue further orders for setting up a CBI Special Investigation Team to investigate into the complaint made by the petitioner.

2.

The petitioner is the sole proprietorship concern of Ms Anju Gupta. She is, inter alia, engaged in the business of exporting goods from India. She alleges that some officials of respondent no.5 (M/s IndusInd Bank) had forged her signatures on Foreign Exchange Forward Confirmation Agreements. She alleges that the same has caused significant loss to her. A complaint in this regard was filed with the SHO, PS Chittaranjan Park on

28.02.2019. It is the petitioner's case that no action has been taken by the concerned police officials in regard to its complaint. 3.

It is also the petitioner's case that the petitioner had requested for certified copies of the said agreements, however, the same have not been provided to the petitioner by respondent no.5. The learned counsel appearing for respondent no.5 states that those agreements are lying in the Chennai Branch. There is no reason for respondent no.5 to deny the petitioner's request for certified copies of agreements allegedly signed by Ms. Gupta. 4.

In view of the above, respondent no.5 bank is directed to ensure that all certified copies of agreements purportedly executed by the petitioner during the period between 21.08.2017 to 28.03.2018, be provided to the petitioner within a period of one week from today. 5.

Insofar as directions to register an FIR are concerned, it is seen that the petitioner has an equally efficacious remedy under Section 154(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) by sending information to the Superintendent of Police. The petitioner has also a remedy by filing an application under Section 156(3) of the CrPC. 6.

In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of leaving it open for the petitioner to avail of such other remedies as available in law. VIBHU BAKHRU, J SEPTEMBER 16, 2019 pkv