← Library
High Court of DelhiW.P.(CRL)/1629/2016

Vipin Kumar v. The State Govt Of NCT Of Delhi & ORS

2017-07-10Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Ashutosh Kumar2 pages

$~9 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 1629/2016 VIPIN KUMAR ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr.A.K.Verma, Adv.

versus THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents Through:

Ms.Nandita Rao, ASC.

SI Amit Kumar, P.S.Farash Bazar.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

O R D E R

% 10.07.2017 The petitioner has approached this Court for the following reliefs:- "(i) To remove the name of the petitioner from the surveillance register and quash the history sheet maintained by the respondent;

(ii) To remove the photographs of the petitioner from the Notice Board of P.S.Farsh Bazar which are pasted by the respondent;

(iii) Not to harass, torture and humiliate the petitioner and save the life and property of petitioner; (iv) Any other and further orders/directions which your Lordship may deem fit and proper also be passed in favour of the petitioner, in the interest of justice." Ms.Nandita Rao, learned Additional Standing Counsel, on instructions and with reference to status report, submits that no doubt the name of the petitioner was kept in Bundle A and, therefore, he was put under surveillance and his photograph was pasted on the wall of the

concerned police station, but taking into account that since 2011 there is no complaint against the petitioner, the name of the petitioner has been shifted to Bundle B which is in fact a dormant Bundle. It is further submitted by Ms.Rao that any name in Bundle B pre-supposes that there would be no surveillance with regard to the activities of the person concerned. A specific statement, on instructions, has been made by Ms.Rao that the photograph of the petitioner which was pasted on the wall of the concerned police station has now been removed. The allegation of the petitioner of his being pressurized by the police authorities for becoming an informer in other cases has also been denied.

Be that as it may, every person has a right to silence and nobody can be forced to make any statement. Any departure from the aforesaid rule can invite necessary action.

Taking into account the aforesaid facts and the statement of Ms.Rao, learned Additional Standing Counsel, this writ petition is not required to be kept pending.

The same is disposed of.

ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J JULY 10, 2017 k