IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. WRIT PETITION No.Writ petition number OF Year of writ petition
IN THE MATTER OF :-
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
FIR No. FIR number/Year of FIR
Under Sections 376/511/354 IPC,
P.S.: Police station, Delhi
INDEX
| S.NO. | PARTICULARS | PAGES |
|---|
| 1. | COURT FEE | |
| 6. | CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 482 OF Cr.P.C. ALONG WITH AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT | |
| 7. | AFFIDAVIT OF THE RESPONDENT NO. 2 / COMPLAINANT | |
| 8. | ANNEXURE P-1 — TRUE AND TRANSLATED COPY OF FIR BEARING NO. FIR number/Year of FIR, P.S.: Police station | |
| 9. | ANNEXURE P-2 — TRUE COPY OF BAIL ORDER DATED Day of bail order date.Month of bail order date.Year of bail order date PASSED BY THE LEARNED ASJ-Number of Additional Sessions Judge, Court complex, NEW DELHI | |
| 10. | ANNEXURE P-3 — COPY OF ID PROOF AND PHOTOGRAPH OF THE PETITIONER AND RESPONDENT NO. 2 | |
| 11. | APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 482 Cr.P.C. FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING CERTIFIED COPIES, WITH AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT | |
| 13. | VAKALATNAMAS OF THE PETITIONER AND RESPONDENT NO. 2 | |
PETITIONER
Through
Place: Place of signing
Dated: Day of court fee date.Month of court fee date.Year of court fee date
Advocate's name & ASSOCIATES
Advocate
Advocate's office address line 1, Advocate's office address line 2,
Delhi-Office PIN code
Mob. No. Advocate's mobile number
Email: Advocate's email address
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. WRIT PETITION No.Writ petition number OF Year of writ petition
IN THE MATTER OF :-
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
THE STATE & ANR.: RESPONDENTS
COURT FEE
Place: Place of signingPetitioner
Dated: Day of court fee date.Month of court fee date.Year of court fee dateThrough
Counsel for the Petitioner
Advocate's name & Associates
Advocate's office address line 1, Advocate's office address line 2,
Delhi-Office PIN code
Mob. No. Advocate's mobile number
Email: Advocate's email address
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. WRIT PETITION No.Writ petition number OF Year of writ petition
IN THE MATTER OF :-
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
THE STATE & ANR.: RESPONDENTS
URGENT APPLICATION
To,
The Hon'ble Joint Registrar,
High Court of Delhi,
New Delhi
Sir/Madam,
Kindly treat the present petition as an urgent one in accordance with the Rules of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. By the present petition, the Petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No. FIR number/Year of FIR, under Sections 376/511/354 IPC, P.S.: Police station, Delhi.
The above-mentioned FIR was lodged by Respondent No. 2 on account of a misunderstanding, and she has stated the same before the learned MM, Court complex Courts, Delhi.
The ground of urgency is: "Early hearing of the captioned petition is sought for."
Place of signing
Date: Day of urgent application date.Month of urgent application date.Year of urgent application date
Filed by:
Counsel for the Petitioner
Advocate's name & Associates
Advocate's office address line 1, Advocate's office address line 2,
Delhi-Office PIN code
Mob. No. Advocate's mobile number
Email: Advocate's email address
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. WRIT PETITION No.Writ petition number OF Year of writ petition
IN THE MATTER OF :-
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
THE STATE & ANR.: RESPONDENTS
FIR No. FIR number/Year of FIR
Under Sections 376/511/354 IPC,
P.S.: Police station,
NOTICE OF MOTION
Sir/Madam,
The enclosed petition for quashing of FIR No. FIR number/Year of FIR in the aforesaid matter is being filed on behalf of the Petitioner, and the same is likely to be listed on Day of listing date.Month of listing date.Year of listing date, or on any other date thereafter, before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi at New Delhi.
Kindly acknowledge receipt of the complete set of the said petition and give notice accordingly.
Thanking you.
PETITIONER
Through
Place: Place of signing
Dated:
Advocate's name & ASSOCIATES
Advocate
Advocate's office address line 1, Advocate's office address line 2,
Delhi-Office PIN code
Mob. No. Advocate's mobile number
Email: Advocate's email address
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. WRIT PETITION No.Writ petition number OF Year of writ petition
IN THE MATTER OF :-
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
THE STATE & ANR.: RESPONDENTS
FIR No. FIR number/Year of FIR
Under Sections 376/511/354 IPC,
P.S.: Police station,
MEMO OF PARTIES
MR. Petitioner's name
S/o Sh. Petitioner's father's name
R/o Petitioner's flat number, Petitioner's address,
New Delhi-Petitioner's PIN code: PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI)
2. PROSECUTRIX
D/o Sh. Prosecutrix's father's name
R/o H. No. Prosecutrix's house number, Prosecutrix's address line,
Prosecutrix's locality, Delhi: RESPONDENTS
Place: Place of signingPETITIONER
:Through
Dated:
Advocate's name & ASSOCIATES
Advocate
Advocate's office address line 1, Advocate's office address line 2,
Delhi-Office PIN code
Mob. No. Advocate's mobile number
Email: Advocate's email address
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. WRIT PETITION No.Writ petition number OF Year of writ petition
IN THE MATTER OF :-
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
THE STATE & ANR.: RESPONDENTS
FIR No. FIR number/Year of FIR
Under Sections 376/511/354 IPC,
P.S.: Police station, Delhi
LIST OF DATES & EVENTS
Day of FIR date.Month of FIR date.Year of FIR dateFIR No. FIR number/Year of FIR was registered under Sections 376/511/354 IPC, P.S.: Police station, Delhi.
The statement of the prosecutrix was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. before the learned MM, Court complex Courts, Delhi.
Day of bail date.Month of bail date.Year of bail dateThe Petitioner was granted regular bail by the learned Sessions Judge, Court complex Courts, Delhi.
PETITIONER
Through
Place: Place of signing
Dated:
Advocate's name & ASSOCIATES
Advocate
Advocate's office address line 1, Advocate's office address line 2,
Delhi-Office PIN code
Mob. No. Advocate's mobile number
Email: Advocate's email address
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. WRIT PETITION No.Writ petition number OF Year of writ petition
IN THE MATTER OF :-
MR. Petitioner's name
S/o Sh. Petitioner's father's name
R/o Petitioner's flat number, Petitioner's address,
New Delhi-Petitioner's PIN code: PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI)
2. PROSECUTRIX
D/o Sh. Prosecutrix's father's name
R/o H. No. Prosecutrix's house number, Prosecutrix's address line,
Prosecutrix's locality, Delhi: RESPONDENTS
FIR No. FIR number/Year of FIR
Under Sections 376/511/354 IPC,
P.S.: Police station,
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973, FOR QUASHING OF THE PROCEEDINGS ARISING OUT OF FIR BEARING NO. FIR number/Year of FIR REGISTERED AT POLICE STATION Police station, DELHI, UNDER SECTIONS 376/511/354 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE.
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:-
1.That the Petitioner is a law-abiding citizen of India and has full faith in the administration of justice. That the Petitioner has invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of FIR No. FIR number/Year of FIR registered at Police Station: Police station, under Sections 376/511/354 of the Indian Penal Code, which was lodged by the prosecutrix / Respondent No. 2 against the Petitioner.
Copy of FIR bearing No. FIR number/Year of FIR is annexed to this petition as Annexure P-1.
2.That the petitioner is aggrieved by the FIR lodged by the prosecutrix / respondent no. 2 at Police Station: Police station. By this petition, the petitioner is inter alia seeking the quashing of the said FIR No. FIR number/Year of FIR and all proceedings emanating thereunder;
3.That the present petition has been filed by the petitioner, and the brief facts of the case necessary for the disposal of the present petition are summed up as under:
3.1It is alleged in the impugned FIR that the complainant works in the office of the petitioner and that, on the date of the alleged incident, the petitioner called her to his cabin, molested her and attempted to rape her.
3.2It is further alleged that the prosecutrix was inappropriately touched by the petitioner. The FIR was registered on Day of FIR registration date.Month of FIR registration date.Year of FIR registration date. The petitioner was called by the Investigating Officer to join the investigation, and when the petitioner reached the police station to join the investigation, he was arrested on the same day and thereafter sent to judicial custody. There are no specific allegations against the petitioner, and he has been falsely implicated by the prosecutrix.
3.2That on Day of bail hearing date.Month of bail hearing date.Year of bail hearing date, during the course of hearing of the bail application of the petitioner before the Ld. Sessions Judge-Number of Sessions Judge hearing bail, South West, Dwarka, the prosecutrix submitted that the allegations were no longer sought to be pursued by her, and the statement of the complainant recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was to the same effect; the prosecutrix rather represented the matter to be a case of misunderstanding.
3.3That on Day of bail order date.Month of bail order date.Year of bail order date, the Ld. Addl. Sessions Judge-Number of Additional Sessions Judge, South West, Dwarka was pleased to grant bail to the petitioner on the basis of the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. of the prosecutrix, wherein she stated that "she perceives no threats from the petitioner if he was to be released on bail".
True copy of the bail order dated Day of bail order date.Month of bail order date.Year of bail order date granted by the Ld. Sessions Judge-Number of Sessions Judge who granted bail, South West, Dwarka is annexed as Annexure P-2.
4.That the impugned FIR was lodged by the prosecutrix owing to a misunderstanding between the employer (petitioner) and the employee (prosecutrix), and the complainant submitted that the allegations were no longer sought to be pursued by her, her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. being to the same effect.
5.Aggrieved by the FIR registered against the petitioner, the petitioner is moving this petition seeking quashing of the FIR on the following, amongst other, grounds:
- : G R O U N D S : -
A.For that it is a settled principle of law that, even otherwise, there is no allegation against the petitioner and no material evidence has been filed against the petitioner which would constitute an offence, and therefore the said FIR is liable to be quashed on this ground alone.
B.For that it is submitted that the present complaint does not disclose any offence alleged to have been committed by the petitioner, inasmuch as the prosecutrix submitted that the allegations were no longer sought to be pursued by her, the statement of the complainant under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded to the same effect, and the prosecutrix rather represented the matter to be a case of misunderstanding.
C.For that, in the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. of the prosecutrix, she stated that "she perceives no threats from the petitioner if he was to be released on bail", vide order dated Day of Section 164 statement date.Month of Section 164 statement date.Year of Section 164 statement date before the Ld. Addl. Sessions Judge-Number of Additional Sessions Judge, South West, Dwarka, Delhi.
D.For that the present FIR fails to show that the petitioner committed any illegal act or made any illegal statement to the complainant, and in the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. before the Ld. Magistrate, respondent no. 2 submitted that the FIR was registered owing to some misunderstanding. There is no material on record to show that the petitioner attempted to rape or inappropriately touched the prosecutrix. None of the ingredients of Sections 376/354 IPC are made out in the FIR.
E.For that the present proceedings have been launched mala fide and by suppression of material facts. The complainant / respondent no. 2 has deliberately suppressed material facts, which are the subject matter of the present FIR. Hence, the present FIR No. FIR number/Year of FIR under Sections 376/511/354 IPC, Police Station: Police station, being an abuse of the process of law, ought to be quashed.
F.For that the present FIR, being ex facie mala fide, falls squarely within the scope of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, reported in AIR 1992 SC 604 (para 107), and the petitioner is entitled to have the proceedings quashed on that ground as well.
G.Because in the present case, no offence under Sections 376/354 IPC is made out, and there is no such allegation in the complaint. It is pertinent to mention that even if the contentions of the complainant are believed to be true, the present case does not fall within that purview.
H.Because it has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of K.R. Purushothaman v. State of Kerala, 2005 (12) SCC 631, that each one of the circumstances must be proved beyond reasonable doubt, and the circumstances so proved must form a chain of events from which the only irresistible conclusion of the guilt of the accused can be safely drawn, and no other hypothesis of guilt is possible. We respectfully agree with the law laid down in Navjot Sandhu's case and K.R. Purushothaman's case.
I.Because it has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, in para 57, that the position which emerges from the above discussion can be summarised thus: the power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal court for compounding offences under Section 320 of the Code. The inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation, but it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in such power, viz., (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. The cases in which the power to quash a criminal proceeding or complaint or FIR may be exercised, where the offender and victim have settled their dispute, would depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case, and no category can be prescribed. However, before exercise of such power, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime. Heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. cannot be fittingly quashed even though the victim or the victim's family and the offender have settled the dispute. Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact upon society. Similarly, any compromise between the victim and the offender in relation to offences under special statutes like the Prevention of Corruption Act, or offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity, etc., cannot provide any basis for quashing criminal proceedings involving such offences. But criminal cases having an overwhelmingly and pre-dominatingly civil flavour stand on a different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularly offences arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions, or offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry, etc., or family disputes where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute. In this category of cases, the High Court may quash criminal proceedings if, in its view, because of the compromise between the offender and the victim, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak, and the continuation of the criminal case would put the accused to great oppression and prejudice, and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case despite full and complete settlement and compromise with the victim. In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceeding, or whether the continuation of the criminal proceeding would tantamount to abuse of the process of law despite the settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer, and whether, to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that the criminal case is put to an end; and if the answer to the above question(s) is in the affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceeding.
J.That in R. Klayani v. Janak C. Mehta & Ors., 2009 (1) SCC 516, it was held in paragraphs 15 and 16 as under:
"15. Propositions of law which emerge from the said decisions are:
(1)The High Court ordinarily would not exercise its inherent jurisdiction to quash a criminal proceeding and, in particular, a first information report, unless the allegations contained therein, even if given their full face value and taken to be correct in their entirety, disclose no cognizable offence. (2) For the said purpose, the Court, save and except in very exceptional circumstances, would not look to any document relied upon by the defence.
(3)Such a power should be exercised very sparingly. If the allegations made in the FIR disclose the commission of an offence, the Court shall not go beyond the same and pass an order in favour of the accused on the ground of absence of any mens rea or actus reus.
(4)If the allegation discloses a civil dispute, the same, by itself, may not be a ground to hold that the criminal proceedings should not be allowed to continue."
It is furthermore well-settled that no hard and fast rule can be laid down, and each case has to be considered on its own merits. While exercising its inherent jurisdiction, the Court, although it would not interfere with a genuine complaint keeping in view the purport and object for which the provisions of Sections 482 and 483 of the Code of Criminal Procedure were introduced by Parliament, would not hesitate to exercise its jurisdiction in appropriate cases. One of the paramount duties of the Superior Courts is to ensure that a person who is apparently innocent is not subjected to persecution and humiliation on the basis of a false and wholly untenable complaint."
K.That, with regard to the power and jurisdiction of this Court to entertain the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the Apex Court, in its recent decision in Prashant Bharti v. State of NCT of Delhi, 2013 (2) AD (S.C.) 89, decided on 23.01.2013, in a similar and identical case, observed inter alia as under:—
"19. The proposition of law pertaining to the quashing of criminal proceedings initiated against an accused by a High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as "the Cr.P.C.") has been dealt with by this Court in Rajiv Thapar & Ors. v. Madan Lal Kapoor (Criminal Appeal No. ... of 2013, arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 4883 of 2008, decided on 23.1.2013), wherein this Court inter alia held as under:
22.The issue being examined in the instant case is the jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., if it chooses to quash the initiation of the prosecution against an accused at the stage of issuing process, or at the stage of committal, or even at the stage of framing of charges. These are all stages before the commencement of the actual trial. The same parameters would naturally be available for later stages as well. The power vested in the High Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., at the stages referred to hereinabove, would have far-reaching consequences, inasmuch as it would negate the prosecution's/complainant's case without allowing the prosecution/complainant to lead evidence. Such a determination must always be rendered with caution, care and circumspection. To invoke its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., the High Court has to be fully satisfied that the material produced by the accused is such as would lead to the conclusion that his/their defence is based on sound, reasonable and indubitable facts; that the material produced is such as would rule out and displace the assertions contained in the charges levelled against the accused; and that the material produced is such as would clearly reject and overrule the veracity of the allegations contained in the accusations levelled by the prosecution/complainant. It should be sufficient to rule out, reject and discard the accusations levelled by the prosecution/complainant without the necessity of recording any evidence. For this purpose, the material relied upon by the defence should not have been refuted, or alternatively, cannot be justifiably refuted, being material of sterling and impeccable quality. The material relied upon by the accused should be such as would persuade a reasonable person to dismiss and condemn the actual basis of the accusations as false. In such a situation, the judicial conscience of the High Court would persuade it to exercise its power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to quash such criminal proceedings, for that would prevent abuse of the process of the court and secure the ends of justice."
L.That the present proceedings have been launched as an engine of oppression, with the sole purpose of restraining the petitioner from pursuing the FIR lodged by the petitioner, by terrorising the petitioner through a motivated and false criminal prosecution.
M.That, on the strength of the allegations, it is clear that no offence is made out against the petitioner, and as such, the said FIR is liable to be quashed.
N.That it is a settled principle of law that, even otherwise, there is no allegation against the petitioner and no material evidence has been filed against the petitioner which would constitute an offence, and therefore the said FIR is liable to be quashed on this ground alone.
6.That the criminal proceeding is manifestly instituted with mala fides and has been initiated with an ulterior motive of wreaking vengeance upon the petitioner, and with a view to spite the petitioner due to a private and personal grudge.
7.That the petitioner craves the leave of this Hon'ble Court to raise such other or further grounds as may be available at the time of the hearing of the present petition.
8.That the petitioner craves leave to alter or amend the petition with the permission of this Hon'ble Court, and by way of the present petition, the petitioner humbly seeks the indulgence of this Hon'ble Court to pass appropriate orders for the quashing of the FIR.
9.That the petitioner has not filed any similar petition in the above-noted matter, either before this Hon'ble Court or before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi or the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.
P R A Y E R
In the facts and circumstances of the case, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to:—
A.Pass an appropriate order/direction quashing FIR No. FIR number/Year of FIR under Section 376/511/354 of the IPC, Police Station: Police station, and all other proceedings emanating therefrom.
B.Pass such other or further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in order to meet the ends of justice.
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed accordingly,
PETITIONER
Through
Place: New Delhi
Dated:
Advocate's name & ASSOCIATES, Advocate
Advocate's office address line 1, Advocate's office address line 2,
Delhi-Office PIN code
Mob. No. Advocate's mobile number
Email:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. WRIT PETITION No. Writ petition number OF Year of writ petition.
IN THE MATTER OF:
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
THE STATE & ANR.: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Mr. Petitioner's name, aged about Petitioner's age years, S/o Sh. Petitioner's father's name, R/o Flat No. Petitioner's flat number, Petitioner's address, New Delhi-Petitioner's PIN code, who do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:—
1.That I am the petitioner in the above-mentioned application and am, therefore, competent to swear this affidavit.
2.That the accompanying Civil Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking the issuance of an appropriate writ, direction or order in the nature of certiorari, mandamus or any other writ, has been drafted by my counsel under my instructions, and the legal submissions made therein are based upon legal advice received and are believed to be true.
3.That the annexures annexed to the accompanying writ petition are true copies of their respective originals.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION
Verified at Delhi on this Day of verification date day of Month of verification date, Year of verification date, that the contents of this affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. WRIT PETITION No. Writ petition number OF Year of writ petition
IN THE MATTER OF:
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
THE STATE & ANR.: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Ms. Prosecutrix's name, aged about Prosecutrix's age years, D/o Sh. Prosecutrix's father's name, R/o H. No. X, Prosecutrix's address, Delhi, who states on solemn affirmation and declares as under:
1.That I am the complainant/Respondent No. 2 in the above-mentioned case, and as such I am conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case and am competent to swear this affidavit.
2.That I have gone through the averments made in the accompanying writ petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The contents thereof have been explained to me in vernacular, and the same are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
3.That I confirm that the FIR in question, bearing No. FIR number/Year of FIR, under Sections 376/354/511 of the Indian Penal Code, registered at PS: Police station, was registered on account of a misunderstanding in the heat of the moment, and I no longer wish to pursue the said FIR.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION
Verified at Delhi on this Day of verification date day of Month of verification date, Year of verification date, that the facts stated in the above affidavit are true to my knowledge, no part thereof is false, and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. M.C. NO. Criminal miscellaneous number OF Year of criminal miscellaneous
IN
CRL. WRIT PETITION No. Writ petition number OF Year of writ petition
IN THE MATTER OF:
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
THE STATE & ANR.: RESPONDENTS
FIR No. FIR number/Year of FIR
U/s.: 376/511/354 IPC,
P.S.: Police station
APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING CERTIFIED COPIES OF THE Certified documents sought to be exempted
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
1.That the petitioner has filed annexures along with the main petition in support of the writ petition, and the annexures so filed are true, correct and compared copies of the originals.
2.That the petitioner shall apply for obtaining the certified copies of the annexures and undertakes to file the same as soon as they are made available by the concerned copying agency.
PRAYER
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly exempt the petitioner from filing the certified copies of the annexures.
Such other and further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed, in the interest of justice.
PETITIONER
Through
Place: New Delhi
Dated:
Advocate's name & ASSOCIATES
Advocate
Advocate's office address line 1, Advocate's office address line 2,
Delhi-Office PIN code
Mob. No. Advocate's mobile number
Email:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. WRIT PETITION No. Writ petition number OF Year of writ petition
IN THE MATTER OF:
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
THE STATE & ANR.: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Mr. Petitioner's name, aged about Petitioner's age years, S/o Sh. Petitioner's father's name, R/o Flat No. Petitioner's flat number, Petitioner's address, New Delhi-Petitioner's PIN code, who solemnly affirms and declares as under:
1.That I am the petitioner in the above-mentioned application and am therefore competent to swear this affidavit.
2.That the submissions on facts made in the accompanying application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking exemption from filing certified copies are based upon legal advice received and are believed to be true.
3.That the annexures annexed to the accompanying application are true copies of their respective originals.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION
Verified at Delhi on this Day of verification date day of Month of verification date, Year of verification date, that the contents of this affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT