Mahesh Shrivastva @ Jeeva v. State (Govt. Of NCT Of Delhi) & ORS.

$~113 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 3803/2024 & CRL.M.A. 36557/2024 MAHESH SHRIVASTVA @ JEEVA .....Petitioners Through:

Mr.

Ashish Upadhyay, Advocate.

versus STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) & ORS.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr.Yasir Rauf Ansari, ASC for the State with Mr.

Alok Sharma and Mr.

Vasu Aggarwal, Advocates along with Insp. Raj Kumar and SI Shiv Singh, PS Lodhi Colony.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN

O R D E R

% 05.12.2024 CRL.M.A. 36557/2024 (Exemption) 1.

Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. 2.

The application stands disposed of.

W.P.(CRL) 3803/2024 3.

The petitioner is essentially aggrieved that the complaints given by him to the Commissioner of Police and other senior police officials in regard to the atrocities committed by certain police officials have not been looked into.

4.

The petitioner alleges that on 17.03.2024, three unknown persons, who had come in a Wagon R car, were asking around for him on the street in front of his house. It is alleged that when the petitioner introduced himself, the said persons started pulling W.P.(CRL) 3803/2024 Page 1 of 3 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

his shirt. It is also alleged that the said persons stated that they are police officials and threatened the petitioner of dire harm. They also allegedly threatened to implicate his elder son in a criminal case. The petitioner made a complaint dated 19.03.2024 in this regard.

5.

It is also alleged that certain police officials forcefully entered the petitioner's house on 14.11.2024 and physically abused his minor son. It is alleged that they have also threatened the minor son of the petitioner to falsely implication in a criminal case. Another complaint dated 19.11.2024 was preferred by the petitioner in relation to the incident.

6.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been named as an accused in a number of cases, and in most of them, he has already been acquitted. 7.

He submits that the same, however, cannot be a reason to illegally enter the house of the petitioner and threaten his family members.

8.

The learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State, at the outset, submits that the petitioner is a habitual offender and externment proceedings are also pending against the petitioner. 9.

He submits that the police officials are permitted to monitor activities of the petitioner. He, however, submits that the complaints dated 19.03.2024 and 19.11.2024, as annexed with the present petition, seem to have been sent on email and there is a possibility that the complaints may not have reached the concerned office/department.

10.

The learned counsel for the petitioner requests that the present petition be treated as a representation. 11.

The learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State fairly submits that appropriate action would be taken on the W.P.(CRL) 3803/2024 Page 2 of 3 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

complaints in accordance with law expeditiously. 12.

Considering the above, this Court does not consider it apposite to keep the present petition pending and pass any order at this stage.

13.

Needless to say, the petitioner is at liberty to file an appropriate proceeding in case any grievance remains in future. 14.

The petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. AMIT MAHAJAN, J DECEMBER 5, 2024 DU W.P.(CRL) 3803/2024 Page 3 of 3 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.