IN THE COURT OF LD. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI
Criminal Revision No. Revision number of 2024
FIR No. FIR number/2021
U/s: 498A/406/34 IPC
P.S.: Police station
IN THE MATTER OF:-
Revisionists' namesREVISIONISTS
V E R S U S
Respondents' namesRESPONDENTS
MEMO OF PARTIES
1.SH. Revisionist 1's name
S/o Sh. Revisionist 1's father's name,
2.MRS. Revisionist 2's name
W/o Sh. Revisionist 2's husband's name
Both R/o Revisionist 2's address,
City.
3.MRS. Revisionist 3's name
W/o Sh. Revisionist 3's husband's name
R/o Revisionist 3's address.
4.MS. Revisionist 4's name
D/o Sh. Revisionist 4's father's name
R/o Revisionist 4's address.
5.SH. Revisionist 5's name
S/o Sh. Revisionist 5's father's name
6.MRS. Revisionist 6's name
W/o Sh. Revisionist 6's husband's name
7.SH. Revisionist 7's name
S/o Sh. Revisionist 7's father's name
8.MR. Revisionist 8's name
S/o Sh. Revisionist 8's father's name
All at Serial Nos. 5 to 8, R/o Revisionists 5 to 8's addressREVISIONISTS
VERSUS
1.Respondent 1's name
2.MRS. Respondent 2's name
W/o Respondent 2's husband's name
D/o Respondent 2's father's name
R/o Respondent 2's address,
New DelhiRESPONDENTS
DELHIREVISIONISTS
THROUGH
DATED
Advocate's name, ADVOCATE
Advocate's address
Mob. No. Advocate's mobile number
Email:
I N D E X
S.No.PARTICULARS
1.MEMO OF PARTIES.
2.REVISION PETITION UNDER SECTION 438 BNSS (OLD SECTION 397 CR.P.C.) ALONG WITH AFFIDAVIT.
3.LIST OF DOCUMENTS.
4.APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 5 OF THE LIMITATION ACT ALONG WITH AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT.
5.APPLICATION FOR STAY ALONG WITH AFFIDAVIT.
6.VAKALATNAMA.
REVISION PETITION UNDER SECTION 438 BNSS (OLD SECTION 397 OF CR.P.C.) AGAINST THE IMPUGNED SUMMONING ORDER DATED Date of the impugned summoning order PASSED BY THE LD. JMFC-02 (MAHILA COURT), PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI, IN FIR BEARING NO. FIR number/2021 UNDER SECTION 498A/406/34 OF I.P.C., P.S. Police station, DELHI, IN CR. CASE NO. Trial court case number TITLED AS "STATE VS Revisionist 1's name & ORS."
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:-
1.That the Revisionists have been constrained to file the present Revision Petition seeking setting aside of the summoning order dated Date of the impugned summoning order passed by the Ld. JMFC-02 (Mahila Court), Patiala House Courts, New Delhi, in FIR No. FIR number/2021 under Section 498A/406/34 of IPC, P.S. Police station, in Cr. Case No. Trial court case number titled as "State Vs Revisionist 1's name & Ors.", whereby the Revisionists have been summoned as accused, and further seeking quashing of the proceedings arising therefrom. Hence, the said summoning order dated Date of the impugned summoning order is impugned herein and is annexed as Annexure P-1.
2.That the Petitioner No. 1 and 2 are the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the Respondent No. 2/Complainant; the Petitioner No. 3 and 4 are the sisters-in-law of the Respondent No. 2; the Petitioner No. 5 and 6 are the uncle and aunt-in-law of the Respondent No. 2; and the Petitioner No. 7 and 8 are the children of the Petitioner No. 5 and 6. It is submitted that the Petitioner No. 3 to 8 are residing separately from the matrimonial home of the Complainant. The Ld. Trial Court took cognizance of the offence under Section 498A/406/34 of IPC and the Revisionists have been summoned as accused on the basis of the FIR/charge-sheet filed by the prosecution against the Revisionists.
3.That though the summoning order is dated Date of the impugned summoning order, the matter is now fixed for Date fixed for next hearing for service upon the petitioners and for their appearance.
4.That in the present case the Complainant has concealed and suppressed material facts, and no material was collected during the course of investigation against the Revisionists; even then, the Ld. Trial Court issued the summoning order, which is impugned in the present petition.
5. That the brief facts leading to the present case are as under:
A.That the marriage of Revisionist 1's name was solemnized with the Respondent No. 2/Complainant on Date of marriage at Marriage venue, without exchange of any gifts or dowry. It is submitted that on Date of engagement an engagement took place at Engagement venue, the expenses whereof, as well as the expenses of the marriage, were borne equally by the parents, i.e., Revisionist No. 1 and 2.
B.After the marriage, the Complainant did not contribute towards the household duties, nor was there any commitment on her part towards a healthy matrimonial life.
C.It is submitted that the Revisionists always extended love and affection to the Complainant. Out of the said wedlock, a male child was born on Date of birth of the male child.
D.That in the last week of Month in which the Complainant left the matrimonial home, the Complainant, along with her belongings/istridhan/gold jewellery etc., left her matrimonial home without informing her husband and in-laws.
E.It is submitted that on Date of the incident at the house of Petitioners 5 to 8, the Complainant and her family members/associates came to the house of the Petitioner No. 5 to 8 at Place of the incident at the house of Petitioners 5 to 8 on the pretext of settlement, but there they picked a quarrel, beat up and abused the Petitioner No. 5 to 8 while threatening them with dire consequences. Resultantly, the Petitioner No. 5 lodged an FIR bearing No. Counter FIR number dated Date of the counter FIR under Sections 147/452/504/33/307/506 of IPC registered with Police station of the counter FIR.
F.That, in retaliation to the said FIR, the Complainant lodged a complaint dated Date of the complaint to the CAW Cell with the CAW Cell, CAW Cell location, against her husband and the present Revisionists, and the same was converted into the present FIR bearing No. FIR number dated Date of registration of the present FIR under Section 498A/406/34 of IPC registered with P.S. Police station, Delhi against the present Revisionists.
G.The Revisionists were summoned by the officials of the CAW Cell on the basis of the false complaint lodged by the Complainant, wherein each and every allegation made in the complaint is factually incorrect and false, and there is no evidence to substantiate the same; rather, there is sufficient material to show that the complaint lodged by the Complainant is baseless and false, and that it has been lodged only in order to harass the Revisionists.
H.During the CAW Cell counselling sessions, it became clear that the Complainant was never interested in maintaining her matrimonial life.
I.It is further submitted that the investigation in the said FIR has been completed, and a charge sheet has been filed against the husband of the Complainant, namely Husband's name, while the Petitioners have been kept in Column No. 12 of the Charge Sheet.
J.It is further submitted that the learned Trial Court, on Cognizance and summons date by Trial Court, took cognizance and issued summons against the Petitioners, which is impugned herein. Hence, the present Revision.
6.That it is the humble submission of the Revisionists that the case of the Complainant is founded upon hypothetical presumptions and untenable facts with regard to the Revisionists, and without due consideration of these facts, the learned Trial Court has passed the impugned order against the Revisionists, which is liable to be set aside on the following grounds:-
GROUNDS
I.Because the learned Trial Court has not considered the contents of the Charge Sheet at the stage of issuance of summons. The learned Trial Court was required to apply its judicial mind to determine whether or not there are grounds for presuming the commission of offences by the Revisionists. Since the issuance of summons affects a person's liberty, the need for proper consideration of the material warranting such an order cannot be over-emphasised. At this stage, before proceeding with the case, the Court must hear both parties to determine whether the accused deserves discharge.
II.Because no case is made out against the Revisionists, who have been falsely roped into the present case by the Complainant, and by misrepresentation, the learned Trial Court has wrongly summoned the Revisionists under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC.
III.Because the learned Trial Court has failed to appreciate that the charge sheet filed by the Investigating Officer kept the Petitioners in Column No. 12, as no corroborative evidence or allegation was found against them, and no prima facie case is made out against the Petitioners.
IV.Because the learned Trial Court has gravely erred in law and on facts by summoning the Petitioners, who were placed in Column No. 12 of the charge sheet, without any material basis. It is respectfully submitted that the learned Trial Court has acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner by issuing summons to the Petitioners, notwithstanding that they were specifically placed in Column No. 12 of the charge sheet. The placement of the Petitioners in Column No. 12 by the Investigating Officer is indicative of the absence of any incriminating evidence or substantial grounds connecting them with the alleged offences. The impugned order, therefore, lacks legal foundation and is patently unsustainable in the eyes of law.
V.Because the learned Trial Court has failed to exercise judicial discretion and has mechanically taken cognizance against the Petitioners without duly applying its judicial mind to the facts and materials on record.
VI.Because the learned Trial Court, while issuing the summoning order, has grossly neglected the fundamental principle that taking cognizance of an offence requires careful scrutiny of the evidence on record. The Court has failed to take into account that the Investigating Officer, after a detailed investigation, did not find any prima facie case against the Petitioners, which led to their inclusion in Column No. 12. The impugned order thus suffers from non-application of mind and is vitiated by a lack of judicial consideration, rendering it liable to be set aside.
VII.Because the learned Trial Court has disregarded the absence of corroborative evidence or substantial allegations against the Petitioners, which forms the very basis of their placement in Column No. 12. The charge sheet filed by the Investigating Officer categorically reflects the absence of any corroborative evidence or credible allegations against the Petitioners, thereby justifying their placement in Column No. 12. The learned Trial Court, however, has summarily disregarded this critical aspect and has proceeded to issue summons without any legal or factual basis. Such an order is perverse and has been passed in complete disregard of the material on record.
VIII.Because the learned Trial Court's summoning order is arbitrary and illegal, as it overlooks the fact that the present FIR No. FIR number/2021 is a counterblast to an FIR lodged by Petitioners Nos. 5 to 8 against the Complainant on Date of earlier FIR lodged by Petitioners Nos. 5 to 8, shortly before the filing of the CAW Complaint dated Date of the complaint to the CAW Cell. The Petitioners submit that the FIR in the present case is a clear counterblast to an earlier FIR lodged by Petitioner No. 5 against the Complainant, which was registered merely a month prior. The learned Trial Court has failed to consider this important fact, which clearly suggests that the present FIR has been lodged with a mala fide intention to harass the Petitioners. The Court's failure to appreciate this aspect demonstrates a clear lack of judicial scrutiny and has resulted in an unjust order that warrants interference by this Hon'ble Court.
IX.Because the impugned order of summoning is in contravention of established legal principles, which dictate that persons placed in Column No. 12 should not be summoned unless there exists fresh evidence or substantial grounds to warrant such action. It is well-settled law that individuals placed in Column No. 12 of the charge sheet should not be summoned by the Court unless fresh evidence or compelling reasons are brought before the Court. In the present case, no such material has been presented, and the learned Trial Court has acted in contravention of these principles by summoning the Petitioners without any justification. The impugned order is therefore unsustainable in law and is liable to be set aside.
X.Because the learned Trial Court's order is perverse, arbitrary, and has been passed without proper application of judicial mind, thereby constituting a gross abuse of the process of law. The impugned order reflects a clear case of non-application of judicial mind and has been passed in a mechanical manner, without due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case. The Petitioners have been unjustly dragged into the criminal proceedings despite the absence of any evidence against them, which amounts to an abuse of the process of law. The learned Trial Court has failed in its duty to protect innocent individuals from being subjected to unwarranted criminal prosecution.
XI.Because the impugned order is liable to be set aside in light of the authoritative pronouncements of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and various High Courts, which have consistently held that persons placed in Column No. 12 should not be summoned in the absence of fresh evidence or substantial grounds.
•Pepsi Foods Ltd. & Anr. v. Special Judicial Magistrate & Ors., (1998) 5 SCC 749: The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the summoning of an accused in a criminal case is a serious matter, and that the Magistrate must exercise caution and carefully scrutinise the evidence on record before issuing summons. The Court emphasised that the process of the criminal court should not be misused as a tool for harassment.
•Sunil Bharti Mittal v. Central Bureau of Investigation, (2015) 4 SCC 609: The Hon'ble Supreme Court reiterated that the process of summoning should not be issued mechanically, and that the Magistrate must apply his mind to the facts of the case and the material on record before proceeding to issue summons.
•M/s. GHCL Employees Stock Option Trust v. India Infoline Ltd., (2013) 4 SCC 505: The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the summoning order must reflect the application of judicial mind and should not be issued in a casual and routine manner.
XII.Because it has been laid down by the Hon'ble Courts that where there is no material brought on record to show that the Revisionists had conspired in any manner or had played any role in carrying out the demand for dowry, no summons ought to have been issued against them.
XIII.Further, there is a total paucity of evidence in the case as regards any false representation made by the Petitioner, or any evidence of inducement by the Petitioner to the Complainant at the initial stage.
XIV.Because from the evidence produced by the Complainant, it is abundantly clear that there was absolutely no material to show that the Petitioner deceived the Complainant or that, by such deception, intentionally induced her to do anything which she would not have done had she not been so deceived. In fact, the complaint itself does not disclose the ingredients of an offence under Sections 498A/406 of the IPC so as to justify even the issuance of process. The evidence and materials brought on record demonstrate that this is a pure case of abuse of the process of the Court. Since no offence is made out as such, the summoning order is liable to be set aside.
XV.The revisionists have also been summoned under Section 498A of the IPC, and a perusal of Section 498A of the IPC, which is reproduced hereunder, is relevant;—
“498A. Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty.—Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine. Explanation.—For the purpose of this section, “cruelty” means—
[(a)](https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1776697/)
any willful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman; or
[(b)](https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1824991/)
harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such demand.”
It is submitted that the revisionists never made any demand for dowry from the respondent, and in the absence of any such demand, no case under the said provision is made out. There is nothing on record to show that the revisionists committed any act as envisaged under Section 498A of the IPC.
XVI.Because there is not even a whisper of any willful conduct on the part of the revisionists, nor of any harassment of the complainant at their hands with a view to coercing her to meet any unlawful demand, so as to attract the provisions of Section 498-A of the IPC. It is submitted that the provisions of Section 498-A of the IPC were introduced with the avowed object of combating the menace of dowry deaths and harassment of a woman at the hands of her husband or his relatives; nevertheless, the provision should not be used as a device to achieve oblique motives. Having carefully perused the complaint and the evidence led in support thereof, it is evident that there is nothing on record to suggest commission of the offence under Section 498-A of the IPC.
XVII. Because the summons must be carefully scrutinised, and the allegations made in the complaint must satisfy the basic ingredients of the offence alleged.
XVIII.It has been held in a catena of judgments that an order passed by the learned Trial Court / Magistrate issuing process against the accused can be quashed;
“(1)Where the allegations made in the complaint or the statements of the witnesses recorded in support of the same, taken at their face value, make out absolutely no case against the accused, or the complaint does not disclose the essential ingredients of the offence alleged against the accused;
(2)Where the allegations made in the complaint are patently absurd and inherently improbable, so that no prudent person can ever reach a conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused;
(3)Where the discretion exercised by the Magistrate in issuing process is capricious and arbitrary, having been based either on no evidence or on materials which are wholly irrelevant or inadmissible; and
(4)Where the complaint suffers from fundamental legal defects, such as want of sanction, or absence of a complaint by a legally competent authority, and the like.”
As held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pepsi Foods Ltd. v. Spl. Judicial Magistrate & Ors., (1998) 5 SCC 749, for summoning the accused in any criminal case there must be some material on record, and in the present case, The specific allegation/assertion made by the respondent merely on the assertion of the respondent will not compel the accused to face trial. The relevant paragraph is submitted hereinabove.
XIX.Because the learned Trial Court would be in a better position to appreciate, upon completion of the inquiry and after hearing the respondent, whether any of the revisionists has been unnecessarily arrayed in the list of accused.
XX.Because the revision petition is maintainable, as issuance of summons is not an interlocutory order within the meaning of Section 397 of the Code, as held in Dhariwal Tobacco Products Limited & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Anr., (2009) 2 SCC 370.
XXI.Because even otherwise, the entire prosecution initiated by the respondents is liable to be set aside in view of the fact that the impugned summoning order is based on surmises and conjectures, without proper application of mind, when as a matter of fact, from a perusal of the complaint and the evidence on record, no case is made out against the revisionists.
XXII. Because, in the present case, criminal proceedings have been lodged on the basis of half-truths, allegations and innuendoes, which would not withstand scrutiny in a court of law. The complaint in question is an abuse of the process of law, as the respondent has filed the said complaint against the revisionists, and the allegations made therein against the revisionists are patently absurd and highly unbelievable.
XXIII.Because the learned Trial Court has failed to appreciate that the submissions made by the respondent before the learned Trial Court were untrue, and the allegations made thereafter were mala fide and frivolous, and the learned Trial Court has not gone into the merits of the case. It is further submitted that the filing of false and frivolous complaints against the revisionists is intended only to harass the revisionists and nothing else.
XXIV.Because the complainant is using the present proceedings as an engine of oppression and for needlessly harassing the revisionists. The judicial process is being misused and abused by the respondent, and the Hon’ble Court must apply its judicial mind to all the relevant facts and circumstances of the matter and to the material produced by the respondent in support of her contentions; it must put a stop to the abuse of process and must not allow the Trial Court to be reduced to an instrument in the hands of the respondent as a means of vendetta to harass persons needlessly.
XXV. Because the learned Trial Court failed to appreciate that the provisions of criminal law require strict interpretation, and the liberty of a person cannot be jeopardised on mere surmises or by travelling beyond the specific provisions of the law. Summoning an accused in a criminal case is not an empty formality. The court issuing process under Section 204 of Cr.P.C. must be satisfied, on the basis of the complaint, documents and other material on record, that there are sufficient grounds for proceeding against the accused [Charanjit Singh v. D.B. Merchang Banking Services Ltd., 2001 III AC (Delhi) 805]. In a criminal case, it is for the complainant to allege and make out all the ingredients of the offence before calling upon the court to proceed against an accused. Only those presumptions permissible under law may be raised against an accused; all other facts are required to be established by the complainant / respondent. Summoning of an accused in a criminal case is a serious matter, and criminal law cannot be set into motion as a matter of course. It is not that the respondent has to bring only two witnesses in support of the allegations in her complaint for the criminal law to be set in motion. The order of the Magistrate summoning the accused must reflect that he has applied his mind to the facts of the case and the law applicable thereto. He has to examine the nature of the allegations made in the complaint and the evidence, both oral and documentary, in support thereof, and consider whether that would be sufficient for the respondent to succeed in bringing home the charge to the accused. The Magistrate is not a silent spectator at the time of recording of the preliminary evidence before summoning of the accused; he has to carefully scrutinise the evidence brought on record and may himself put questions to the respondent and her witnesses in order to elicit answers and ascertain the truthfulness or otherwise of the allegations, and then examine whether any offence is prima facie committed by all or any of the accused, as held in Pepsi Foods Ltd. & Anr. v. S.J. Magistrate and Ors., JT 1997 (8) SC 705.
XXVI.It is further submitted that the facts relied upon by the complainant are neither true nor correct. The Learned Trial Court, without adverting to the merits of the case, has proceeded to summon the Revisionists.
XXVII.That the Learned Trial Court has failed to appreciate that it was necessary for the complainant to adduce evidence before the Trial Court in order to summon the Revisionists under the relevant provisions of the Indian Penal Code. The Learned Trial Court has failed to follow the due process of law and has committed a grave error in passing the impugned order solely on the basis of the active concealment practised by the respondent therein. The order dated Date of the impugned summoning order therefore suffers from an error of law, and grave and irreparable loss would be caused to the Revisionists.
XXVIII.Because this is a case in which the respondent has withheld important documents, and, having not approached the Court with clean hands, the respondent is not entitled to any relief. In this regard, reliance is placed on the decisions in S. P. Chengalvaraya Naidu v. Jagannath, 1994 (1) SCC 1, and MCD v. State of Delhi & Anr., (2005) 4 SCC 605.
XXIX.Because the Learned Trial Court has ignored the question whether this is a case of a cognizable offence or whether it actually involves a civil dispute. The Learned Magistrate has apparently not recorded any observation of his own on this point.
Paragraph number.That the Learned Trial Court committed a serious illegality in passing the impugned order against the Revisionists on the basis of vague and general allegations made by the respondent against the present Revisionists.
Paragraph number.That the Learned Trial Court failed to appreciate that there is no prima facie case against the Revisionists, and that the prosecution has miserably failed to place on record any incriminating material against the Revisionists sufficient to bring them within the four corners of Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC. In the facts and circumstances of this case, the Learned Trial Court ought not to have accepted all the statements of the prosecution as gospel truth.
City.That the Revisionists respectfully submit that the respondent, being the complainant in the present FIR, has attempted to overreach the law by her artful manoeuvrings in misrepresenting the facts of the case with regard to the Revisionists. It is the humble submission of the Revisionists that the FIR is founded on hypothetical presumptions and untenable allegations, and the proceedings initiated against the Revisionists by the complainant by way of the said FIR are liable to be set aside for the reasons submitted hereunder.
FIR number.That it is respectfully submitted that there are no specific allegations against the Revisionists, and no case under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC is made out against them even if the allegations are taken to be true verbatim.
7.No illegality has been committed by the Revisionists; rather, illegality has been committed by the complainant in lodging the complaint against the Revisionists. The complainant does not specifically state that the Revisionists have committed any offence under the Indian Penal Code or are otherwise guilty under its provisions.
8.That the Learned Trial Court failed to appreciate that the Revisionists have been named by the prosecution with mala fide intentions.
9.That it would be contrary to the fundamental principles of the legal system if an innocent person were implicated in a false case in this manner.
10.That the legal position is well settled that the process of the Court cannot be utilised for any oblique purpose, and where, in the opinion of the Court, the chances of ultimate conviction are bleak, and no useful purpose is likely to be served by allowing the criminal prosecution to continue, the Court may discharge the accused, even at a preliminary stage.
11.That there is nothing on record connecting the present Revisionists with the commission of the alleged offences. The allegations made are blatantly absurd and inherently improbable, and no prudent person could reach a conclusion that there are sufficient grounds for proceeding against the Revisionists.
12.That the criminal proceedings are manifestly tainted with mala fides and have been instituted with an ulterior motive of wreaking vengeance upon the Revisionists and of spiting them out of a private and personal grudge.
13.That the Revisionists crave leave of this Hon'ble Court to raise such other and further grounds as may be available to them at the time of hearing of the present petition. The Revisionists have caused their appearance before the Learned Trial Court, and charge has been framed against them.
14.That the Revisionists crave leave to alter or amend the petition with the permission of this Hon'ble Court, and by way of the present petition the Revisionists humbly seek the indulgence of this Hon'ble Court to pass appropriate orders setting aside the impugned order arising out of the FIR lodged by the complainant.
P R A Y E R :-
In view of the submissions made above and under the circumstances of the case, it is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to:-
a)Call for the records of the Learned Designation of the trial court (Mahila Court), Name of the trial court complex, in FIR No. FIR number/Year of the FIR under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC with P.S.: Police station in Cr. Case No. Criminal case number, titled as "Title of the criminal case", and
b)Set aside the impugned summoning order dated Date of the impugned summoning order passed by the Learned Designation of the trial court (Mahila Court), Name of the trial court complex, in FIR No. FIR number/Year of the FIR under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC with P.S.: Police station in Cr. Case No. Criminal case number, titled as "Title of the criminal case", and
c)Quash the proceedings thereunder pending against the Revisionists before the Learned Trial Court, and
d)Pass such other and further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in favour of the Revisionists.
It is prayed accordingly.
CityREVISIONISTS
THROUGH
DATED: Date of filing
Advocate's name, ADVOCATE
Advocate's address
Mob. No.: Advocate's mobile number
Email: Advocate's email address
Revisionists' names
IN THE COURT OF THE LD. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI.
CRIMINAL REVISION No. Revision number OF Year of filing of the revision.
IN THE MATTER OF:-
Revisionists' namesREVISIONISTS
V E R S U S
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
FIR No. FIR number/Year of the FIR
Under Sections: 498A/406/34 IPC
P.S.: Police station
APPLICATION ON BEHALF OF THE REVISIONISTS SEEKING STAY OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND OF THE PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE THE LEARNED Designation of the trial court (MAHILA COURT), Name of the trial court complex, IN FIR BEARING NO. FIR number/Year of the FIR UNDER SECTIONS 498A/406/34 OF THE I.P.C. WITH P.S. Police station, IN CR. CASE NO. Criminal case number, TITLED AS "Title of the criminal case".
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH :-
1.That the Revisionists have filed the accompanying revision petition under Section 438 of the BNSS (corresponding to the erstwhile Section 397 of the CrPC) against the impugned summoning order dated Date of the impugned summoning order passed by the Learned Designation of the trial court (Mahila Court), Name of the trial court complex, in FIR No. FIR number/Year of the FIR under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC with P.S.: Police station in Cr. Case No. Criminal case number, titled as "Title of the criminal case", before this Hon'ble Court, and the same is pending disposal. The contents of the said petition are true to the knowledge of the Revisionists and are to be read as an integral part of this application, the same not being reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
2.That in the event the proceedings before the Learned Trial Court are not stayed, the Revisionists shall suffer an irreparable loss and injury which cannot be compensated in any manner whatsoever, and the very purpose of filing the accompanying revision petition shall be rendered infructuous.
3.That the Revisionists have a very good prima facie case in their favour and have every hope of succeeding in the same.
4.That the balance of convenience also lies in favour of the Revisionists and against the Respondents.
P R A Y E R :-
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass an ad interim order whereby the operation of the impugned order dated Date of the impugned summoning order passed by the Ld. Designation of the trial court magistrate (Mahila Court), Name of the courts complex, in FIR No.FIR number/Year of the FIR under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC with P.S.: Police station, in Cr. Case No.Criminal case number, titled as “State Vs. Names of the accused in the case title”, may kindly be stayed till the final disposal of the present revision petition, in the interest of justice.
Pass any other or further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in favour of the Revisionists and in the interest of justice.
It is prayed accordingly.
DELHIREVISIONISTS
THROUGH
DATED
Revisionists' names
Advocate's name, ADVOCATE
Advocate's address
Mob. No. Advocate's mobile number
Email: Advocate's email address
IN THE COURT OF LD. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE;
PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI.
CRIMINAL REVISION No. Revision number OF 2024.
IN THE MATTER OF:-
Revisionists' namesREVISIONISTS
V E R S U S
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
FIR NO. FIR number/Year of the FIR
U/s: 498A/406/34 IPC
P.S.: Police station
APPLICATION ON BEHALF OF THE REVISIONISTS UNDER SECTION 5 OF THE LIMITATION ACT FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING THE PRESENT REVISION PETITION AGAINST THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED Date of the impugned summoning order PASSED BY THE LD. Designation of the trial court magistrate (MAHILA COURT), Name of the courts complex, IN FIR NO.FIR number/Year of the FIR U/S 498A/406/34 OF IPC WITH P.S.: Police station IN CR. CASE NO.Criminal case number TITLED AS “STATE VS. Names of the accused in the case title”.
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH :-
1.That the Revisionists have filed the accompanying revision petition under Section 438 BNSS (Old Section 397 of CrPC) against the impugned summoning order dated Date of the impugned summoning order passed by the Ld. Designation of the trial court magistrate (Mahila Court), Name of the courts complex, in FIR No.FIR number/Year of the FIR under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC with P.S.: Police station, in Cr. Case No.Criminal case number, titled as “State Vs. Names of the accused in the case title”, before this Hon'ble Court, and the same is pending for disposal. The contents of the said revision petition are true to the knowledge of the Revisionists and are to be read as an integral part of this application, as the same are not being reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
2.It is submitted that the Revisionists are permanent residents outside Delhi, i.e. at Places of residence of the revisionists, and they learnt of the present proceedings on Date revisionists learnt of proceedings from Source of information, as a result of which the Revisionists could not file the present revision petition earlier, in the absence of supply of the charge sheet.
3.Moreover, only on Date of service of charge sheet, Accused No. 1 was served with a copy of the charge sheet, and on this basis the present revision petition has been filed within limitation, i.e. within Limitation period in days days from the date of supply of the charge sheet. However, as an abundant precaution, the Revisionists are filing the present application.
4.That in the aforesaid circumstances, the Revisionists seek the intervention of this Hon'ble Court to condone the delay, if any, in filing the present revision petition.
5.That the Revisionists have a very good prima facie case in their favour and have every hope of succeeding in the same.
6.That the balance of convenience also lies in favour of the Revisionists.
P R A Y E R :-
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the present application and to condone the delay in filing the revision petition against the impugned order dated Date of the impugned summoning order passed by the Ld. Designation of the trial court magistrate (Mahila Court), Name of the courts complex, in FIR No.FIR number/Year of the FIR under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC with P.S.: Police station, in Cr. Case No.Criminal case number, in the interest of justice.
Pass any other or further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and in favour of the Revisionists.
It is prayed accordingly.
DELHIREVISIONISTS
THROUGH
DATED
Revisionists' names
Advocate's name, ADVOCATE
Advocate's address
Mob. No. Advocate's mobile number
Email: Advocate's email address
IN THE COURT OF LD. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE;
PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI.
CRIMINAL REVISION No. Revision number OF 2024.
IN THE MATTER OF:-
Revisionists' namesREVISIONISTS
V E R S U S
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Sh. Deponent 1's name, aged about Deponent 1's age years, S/o Deponent 1's father's name, R/o Deponent 1's address, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-
1.That I am Revisionist No. 1 in the above-mentioned case and, as such, I am conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case and hence competent to swear this affidavit.
2.That the contents of the accompanying Revision Petition under Section 438 BNSS (Old Section 397 of CrPC) have been read over and explained to me in vernacular language, and having understood the same, I say that the facts stated therein are true to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Place of verification this Day of verification day of Month and year of verification. That the contents of the above affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, no part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF LD. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE;
PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI.
CRIMINAL REVISION No. Revision number OF 2024.
IN THE MATTER OF:-
Revisionists' namesREVISIONISTS
V E R S U S
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Sh. Deponent 2's name, aged about Deponent 2's age years, S/o Deponent 2's father's name, R/o Deponent 2's address, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-
1.That I am Revisionist No. 1 in the above-mentioned case and, as such, I am conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case and hence competent to swear this affidavit.
2.That the contents of the accompanying application have been read over and explained to me in vernacular language, and having understood the same, I say that the facts stated therein are true to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Place of verification this Day of verification day of Month and year of verification. That the contents of the above affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, no part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF LD. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE;
PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI.
CRIMINAL REVISION No. Revision number OF 2024.
IN THE MATTER OF:-
Revisionists' namesREVISIONISTS
V E R S U S
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Sh. Deponent 3's name, aged about Deponent 3's age years, S/o Deponent 3's father's name, R/o Deponent 3's address, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-
1.That I am Revisionist No. 1 in the above-mentioned case and, as such, I am conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case and hence competent to swear this affidavit.
2.That the contents of the accompanying application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act have been read over and explained to me in vernacular language, and having understood the same, I say that the facts stated therein are true to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Place of verification this Day of verification day of Month of the affidavit, Year of the affidavit. That the contents of the above Affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge; no part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF LD. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE
PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI
CRIMINAL REVISION No. Revision number OF Year of the affidavit
IN THE MATTER OF:-
Revisionists' namesREVISIONISTS
V E R S U S
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Mrs. Deponent 4's name, aged about Deponent 4's age years, W/o Sh. Deponent 4's husband's name, R/o Deponent 4's address, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-
1.That I am the revisionist no.2 in the above-mentioned case and, as such, I am conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case and am hence competent to swear this Affidavit.
2.That the contents of the accompanying Revision Petition under Section 438 BNSS (Old Sec. 397 of Cr.P.C.) have been read over and explained to me in the vernacular language and, having understood the same, I state that the facts stated therein are true to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Place of verification this Day of verification day of Month of the affidavit, Year of the affidavit. That the contents of the above Affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge; no part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF LD. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE
PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI
CRIMINAL REVISION No. Revision number OF Year of the affidavit
IN THE MATTER OF:-
Revisionists' namesREVISIONISTS
V E R S U S
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Mrs. Deponent 5's name, aged about Deponent 5's age years, W/o Sh. Deponent 5's husband's name, R/o Deponent 5's address, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-
1.That I am the revisionist no.2 in the above-mentioned case and, as such, I am conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case and am hence competent to swear this Affidavit.
2.That the contents of the accompanying application have been read over and explained to me in the vernacular language and, having understood the same, I state that the facts stated therein are true to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Place of verification this Day of verification day of Month of the affidavit, Year of the affidavit. That the contents of the above Affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge; no part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF LD. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE
PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI
CRIMINAL REVISION No. Revision number OF Year of the affidavit
IN THE MATTER OF:-
Revisionists' namesREVISIONISTS
V E R S U S
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Mrs. Deponent 6's name, aged about Deponent 6's age years, W/o Sh. Deponent 6's husband's name, R/o Deponent 6's address, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-
1.That I am the revisionist no.2 in the above-mentioned case and, as such, I am conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case and am hence competent to swear this Affidavit.
2.That the contents of the accompanying application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act have been read over and explained to me in the vernacular language and, having understood the same, I state that the facts stated therein are true to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Place of verification this Day of verification day of Month of the affidavit, Year of the affidavit. That the contents of the above Affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge; no part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF LD. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE
PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI
CRIMINAL REVISION No. Revision number OF Year of the affidavit
IN THE MATTER OF:-
Revisionists' namesREVISIONISTS
V E R S U S
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Mrs. Deponent 7's name, aged about Deponent 7's age years, W/o Sh. Deponent 7's husband's name, R/o Deponent 7's address, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-
1.That I am the revisionist no.3 in the above-mentioned case and, as such, I am conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case and am hence competent to swear this Affidavit.
2.That the contents of the accompanying Revision Petition under Section 438 BNSS (Old Sec. 397 of Cr.P.C.) have been read over and explained to me in the vernacular language and, having understood the same, I state that the facts stated therein are true to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Place of verification this Day of verification day of Month of the affidavit, Year of the affidavit. That the contents of the above Affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge; no part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF LD. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE
PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI
CRIMINAL REVISION No. Revision number OF Year of the affidavit
IN THE MATTER OF:-
Revisionists' namesREVISIONISTS
V E R S U S
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Mrs. Deponent 8's name, aged about Deponent 8's age years, W/o Sh. Deponent 8's husband's name, R/o Deponent 8's address, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-
1.That I am the revisionist no.3 in the above-mentioned case and, as such, I am conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case and am hence competent to swear this Affidavit.
2.That the contents of the accompanying application have been read over and explained to me in the vernacular language and, having understood the same, I state that the facts stated therein are true to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Place of verification this Day of verification day of Month of the affidavit, Year of the affidavit. That the contents of the above Affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge; no part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF LD. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE
PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI
CRIMINAL REVISION No. Revision number OF Year of the affidavit
IN THE MATTER OF:-
Revisionists' namesREVISIONISTS
V E R S U S
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Mrs. Deponent 9's name, aged about Deponent 9's age years, W/o Sh. Deponent 9's husband's name, R/o Deponent 9's address, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-
1.That I am the revisionist no.3 in the above-mentioned case and, as such, I am conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case and am hence competent to swear this Affidavit.
2.That the contents of the accompanying application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act have been read over and explained to me in the vernacular language and, having understood the same, I state that the facts stated therein are true to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Place of verification this Day of verification day of Month of the affidavit, Year of the affidavit. That the contents of the above Affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge; no part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF LD. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE
PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI
CRIMINAL REVISION No. Revision number OF Year of the affidavit
IN THE MATTER OF:-
Revisionists' namesREVISIONISTS
V E R S U S
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Deponent 10's name, aged about Deponent 10's age years, S/o Sh. Deponent 10's father's name, R/o Deponent 10's address, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-
1.That I am well conversant with the facts and circumstances of the above-mentioned case and am hence competent to swear this Affidavit.
2.That the contents of the accompanying application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act have been read over and explained to me in the vernacular language and, having understood the same, I state that the facts stated therein are true to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Place of verification this Day of verification day of Month of the affidavit, Year of the affidavit. That the contents of the above Affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge; no part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
Deponent 10's address: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Ms Place of verification, aged about Day of verification years, D/o Sh. Revision number, R/o Revisionists' names Respondents' names, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-
1.That I am revisionist no. 4 in the above-mentioned case, and as such I am conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case and hence competent to swear this affidavit.
2.That the contents of the accompanying Revision Petition under Section 438 BNSS (old Section 397 Cr.P.C.) have been read over and explained to me in the vernacular language, and having understood the same, I state that the facts stated therein are true to the best of my knowledge and belief and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Deponent 11's name on this Deponent 11's age day of August, 2024, that the contents of the above affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, that no part of it is false and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF LD. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI.
CRIMINAL REVISION No. Deponent 11's father's name OF 2024.
IN THE MATTER OF:-
Deponent 11's addressREVISIONISTS
V E R S U S
Deponent 11's address: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Place of verification, aged about Day of verification years, D/o Sh. Revision number, R/o Revisionists' names Respondents' names, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-
1.That I am revisionist no. 4 in the above-mentioned case, and as such I am conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case and hence competent to swear this affidavit.
2.That the contents of the accompanying application have been read over and explained to me in the vernacular language, and having understood the same, I state that the facts stated therein are true to the best of my knowledge and belief and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Deponent 12's name on this Deponent 12's age day of August, 2024, that the contents of the above affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, that no part of it is false and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF LD. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI.
CRIMINAL REVISION No. Deponent 12's father's name OF 2024.
IN THE MATTER OF:-
Deponent 12's addressREVISIONISTS
V E R S U S
Deponent 12's address: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Place of verification, aged about Day of verification years, D/o Sh. Revision number, R/o Revisionists' names Respondents' names, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-
1.That I am revisionist no. 4 in the above-mentioned case, and as such I am conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case and hence competent to swear this affidavit.
2.That the contents of the accompanying application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act have been read over and explained to me in the vernacular language, and having understood the same, I state that the facts stated therein are true to the best of my knowledge and belief and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Deponent 13's name on this Deponent 13's age day of August, 2024, that the contents of the above affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, that no part of it is false and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF LD. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI.
CRIMINAL REVISION No. Deponent 13's father's name OF 2024.
IN THE MATTER OF:-
Deponent 13's addressREVISIONISTS
V E R S U S
Deponent 13's address: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Sh. Deponent 13's present location, aged about Place of verification years, S/o Day of verification, R/o Revision number, Revisionists' names, presently at Respondents' names, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-
1.That I am revisionist no. 5 in the above-mentioned case, and as such I am conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case and hence competent to swear this affidavit.
2.That the contents of the accompanying Revision Petition under Section 438 BNSS (old Section 397 Cr.P.C.) have been read over and explained to me in the vernacular language, and having understood the same, I state that the facts stated therein are true to the best of my knowledge and belief and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Deponent 14's name on this Deponent 14's age day of August, 2024, that the contents of the above affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, that no part of it is false and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF LD. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI.
CRIMINAL REVISION No. Deponent 14's father's name OF 2024.
IN THE MATTER OF:-
Deponent 14's addressREVISIONISTS
V E R S U S
Deponent 14's address: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Sh. Deponent 14's present location, aged about Place of verification years, S/o Day of verification, R/o Revision number, Revisionists' names, presently at Respondents' names, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-
1.That I am revisionist no. 5 in the above-mentioned case, and as such I am conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case and hence competent to swear this affidavit.
2.That the contents of the accompanying application have been read over and explained to me in the vernacular language, and having understood the same, I state that the facts stated therein are true to the best of my knowledge and belief and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Deponent 15's name on this Deponent 15's age day of August, 2024, that the contents of the above affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, that no part of it is false and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF LD. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI.
CRIMINAL REVISION No. Deponent 15's father's name OF 2024.
IN THE MATTER OF:-
Deponent 15's addressREVISIONISTS
V E R S U S
Deponent 15's address: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Sh. Deponent 15's present location, aged about Place of verification years, S/o Day of verification, R/o Revision number, Revisionists' names, presently at Details, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-
1.That I am revisionist no. 5 in the above-mentioned case, and as such I am conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case and hence competent to swear this affidavit.
2.That the contents of the accompanying application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act have been read over and explained to me in the vernacular language, and having understood the same, I state that the facts stated therein are true to the best of my knowledge and belief and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Details on this Details day of August, 2024, that the contents of the above affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, that no part of it is false and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF LD. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI.
CRIMINAL REVISION No. Details OF 2024.
IN THE MATTER OF:-
DetailsREVISIONISTS
V E R S U S
Details: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Mrs. Details, aged about Details years, W/o Sh. Details, R/o Details, Details, presently at Details, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-
1.That I am revisionist no. 6 in the above-mentioned case, and as such I am conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case and hence competent to swear this affidavit.
2.That the contents of the accompanying Revision Petition under Section 438 BNSS (Old Sec. 397 of Cr.P.C.) have been read over and explained to me in the vernacular language, and, having understood the same, I state that the facts set out therein are true to the best of my knowledge and belief, that no part of them is false, and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Details on this Details day of Month and year of verification. That the contents of the above Affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, that no part of it is false, and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF LD. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE;
Place of the courts complex.
CRIMINAL REVISION No. Details OF Year of the criminal revision number.
IN THE MATTER OF:-
DetailsREVISIONISTS
V E R S U S
Details: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Mrs. Details, aged about Details years, W/o Sh. Details, R/o Details, Details, presently at Details, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-
1.That I am revisionist no. Number of the revisionist in the case in the above-mentioned case, and as such I am conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case, and hence competent to swear this Affidavit.
2.That the contents of the accompanying application have been read over and explained to me in the vernacular language, and, having understood the same, I state that the facts set out therein are true to the best of my knowledge and belief, that no part of them is false, and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Details on this Details day of Month and year of verification. That the contents of the above Affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, that no part of it is false, and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF LD. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE;
Place of the courts complex.
CRIMINAL REVISION No. Details OF Year of the criminal revision number.
IN THE MATTER OF:-
DetailsREVISIONISTS
V E R S U S
Details: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Mrs. Details, aged about Details years, W/o Sh. Details, R/o Details, Details, presently at Details, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-
1.That I am revisionist no. Number of the revisionist in the case in the above-mentioned case, and as such I am conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case, and hence competent to swear this Affidavit.
2.That the contents of the accompanying application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act have been read over and explained to me in the vernacular language, and, having understood the same, I state that the facts set out therein are true to the best of my knowledge and belief, that no part of them is false, and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Details on this Details day of Month and year of verification. That the contents of the above Affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, that no part of it is false, and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF LD. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE;
Place of the courts complex.
CRIMINAL REVISION No. Details OF Year of the criminal revision number.
IN THE MATTER OF:-
DetailsREVISIONISTS
V E R S U S
Details: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Mr. Details, aged about Details years, S/o Sh. Details, R/o Details, Details, presently at Details, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-
1.That I am revisionist no. Number of the revisionist in the case in the above-mentioned case, and as such I am conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case, and hence competent to swear this Affidavit.
2.That the contents of the accompanying Revision Petition under Section 438 BNSS (Old Sec. 397 of Cr.P.C.) have been read over and explained to me in the vernacular language, and, having understood the same, I state that the facts set out therein are true to the best of my knowledge and belief, that no part of them is false, and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Details on this Details day of Month and year of verification. That the contents of the above Affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, that no part of it is false, and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF LD. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE;
Place of the courts complex.
CRIMINAL REVISION No. Details OF Year of the criminal revision number.
IN THE MATTER OF:-
DetailsREVISIONISTS
V E R S U S
Details: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Mr. Details, aged about Details years, S/o Sh. Details, R/o Details, Details, presently at Details, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-
1.That I am revisionist no. Number of the revisionist in the case in the above-mentioned case, and as such I am conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case, and hence competent to swear this Affidavit.
2.That the contents of the accompanying application have been read over and explained to me in the vernacular language, and, having understood the same, I state that the facts set out therein are true to the best of my knowledge and belief, that no part of them is false, and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Details on this Details day of Month and year of verification. That the contents of the above Affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, that no part of it is false, and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF LD. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE;
Place of the courts complex.
CRIMINAL REVISION No. Details OF Year of the criminal revision number.
IN THE MATTER OF:-
DetailsREVISIONISTS
V E R S U S
Details: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Mr. Details, aged about Details years, S/o Sh. Details, R/o Details, Details, presently at Details, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-
1.That I am revisionist no. Number of the revisionist in the case in the above-mentioned case, and as such I am conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case, and hence competent to swear this Affidavit.
2.That the contents of the accompanying application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act have been read over and explained to me in the vernacular language, and, having understood the same, I state that the facts set out therein are true to the best of my knowledge and belief, that no part of them is false, and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Details on this Details day of Month and year of verification. That the contents of the above Affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, that no part of it is false, and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF LD. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE;
Place of the courts complex.
CRIMINAL REVISION No. Details OF Year of the criminal revision number.
IN THE MATTER OF:-
DetailsREVISIONISTS
V E R S U S
Details: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Mr. Details, aged about Details years, S/o Sh. Details, R/o Details, Details, presently at Details, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-
1.That I am revisionist no. Number of the revisionist in the case in the above-mentioned case, and as such I am conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case, and hence competent to swear this Affidavit.
2.That the contents of the accompanying Revision Petition under Section 438 BNSS (Old Sec. 397 of Cr.P.C.) have been read over and explained to me in the vernacular language, and, having understood the same, I state that the facts set out therein are true to the best of my knowledge and belief, that no part of them is false, and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Details on this Details day of Month and year of verification. That the contents of the above Affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, that no part of it is false, and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF LD. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE;
Place of the courts complex.
CRIMINAL REVISION No. Details OF Year of the criminal revision number.
IN THE MATTER OF:-
DetailsREVISIONISTS
V E R S U S
Details: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Mr. Details, aged about Details years, S/o Sh. Details, R/o Details, Details, presently at Details, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-
1.That I am the revisionist no.8 in the above mentioned case and as such I am conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case, and hence competent to swear this Affidavit.
2.That the contents of the accompanying application have been read over and explained to me in vernacular language and having understood the same I say that the facts stated therein are true to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Details this Details day of August, 2024. That the contents of the above Affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, no part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF LD. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE;
PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI.
CRIMINAL REVISION No. Details OF 2024.
IN THE MATTER OF:-
DetailsREVISIONISTS
V E R S U S
Details: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Mr. Details, aged about Details years, S/o Sh. Details, R/o Details, Details., presently at Details , do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-
1.That I am the revisionist no.8 in the above mentioned case and as such I am conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case, and hence competent to swear this Affidavit.
2.That the contents of the accompanying application U/s 5 of Limitation Act, have been read over and explained to me in vernacular language and having understood the same I say that the facts stated therein are true to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Details this Details day of August, 2024. That the contents of the above Affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, no part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT