B v. Commissioner Of Police And ANR

$~62 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 2500/2024 .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Niraj Chaudhry, Advocate with petitioner in-person.

versus COMMISSIONER OF POLICE AND ANR .....Respondents Through:

Mr. Alok Sharma, Advocate for Mr.

Yasir Rauf Ansari, ASC (Crl.) for the State and SI Reena Kumari, P.S.:

Budh Vihar.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI

O R D E R

% 16.08.2024 CRL.M.A. 24351/2024 Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions. The application stands disposed-of.

W.P.(CRL) 2500/2024 By way of the present petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, the petitioner seeks a direction to respondent No.1/Commissioner of Police through S.H.O., P.S.: Budh Vihar, Delhi to perform and discharge their duties in accordance with law, premised on their grievance detailed in complaint dated 31.07.2024 addressed to DCP, Rohini, Delhi.

2.

Mr. Niraj Chaudhry, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is also seeking a direction to change the Investigating Officer ('I.O.') in the matter, premised on the allegation that the I.O. is not performing her duties.

W.P.(CRL) 2500/2024 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 21/08/2024 at 15:17:32

3.

The present petition arises from FIR No. 0174/2024 dated 22.06.2024 registered under sections 376/506/328 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at P.S.: Budh Vihar, Delhi, with the essential allegation that the accused/respondent No.2 has committed the alleged offences based on a false promise of marriage.

4.

The court is informed that vide order dated 24.07.2024, an anticipatory bail petition filed by respondent No.2 has been dismissed by the learned Sessions Court.

5.

Mr. Chaudhry submits, that the essential grievance is that despite the anticipatory bail petition of respondent No. 2 having been dismissed, respondent No.2 has not been arrested. Counsel submits that the petitioner is in a position to give inputs to the I.O. to help in tracing and arresting respondent No.2.

6.

In the circumstances, this court finds no cogent basis to issue notice in the matter since the contention that the I.O. is not performing her duties, seems to be premature, at the least.

7.

The petition is accordingly disposed-of, with a direction to the I.O. to pursue the matter in accordance with law, including on the basis of any inputs that the petitioner may offer.

8.

Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed-of. ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J AUGUST 16, 2024 ds W.P.(CRL) 2500/2024 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 21/08/2024 at 15:17:32