IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

CRL. MISC. MAIN NO._______ OF 2023.

IN THE MATTER OF:-

___________________                       : PETITIONER

VERSUS

_____________________________   : RESPONDENTS

INDEX

Drawn &Filed by:

Place: New Delhi

Dated:

_________________________

ADVOCATES AND LEGAL CONSULTANTS

_______________________,

NEW DELHI-110014.

PHONE: ____________________

EMAIL: _____________________

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

CRL. MISC. MAIN NO._______ OF 2023.

IN THE MATTER OF:-

____________________                               : PETITIONER

VERSUS

________________________                       : RESPONDENTS

NOTICE OF MOTION

To

The State of (NCT of Delhi)

Sir,

This is to inform you that a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India R/w Section 482 CrPC is being filed by us in the Registry of the Hon’ble High Court. Please receive a copy of the above said Petition.  The petition is likely to come up for hearing before the Hon’ble High Court on  ___08.2023 or any date thereafter, on which you may kindly be present in the Hon’ble Court to assist the Court.

Drawn &Filed by:

Place: New Delhi

Dated:

______________________________

ADVOCATES AND LEGAL CONSULTANTS

____________________________________ ,

NEW DELHI-110014.

PHONE: +91 _________________

EMAIL:____________________________

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

CRL. MISC. MAIN NO._______ OF 2023.

IN THE MATTER OF:-

___________________                                 : PETITIONER

VERSUS

_____________________                             : RESPONDENTS

URGENT APPLICATION

To,

The Hon’ble Registrar

Hon'ble High Court of Delhi

New Delhi

Sir,

          Will you kindly treat the accompanying Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India R/w Section 482 of CrPC as an urgent one in accordance with the High Court Rules and Orders. The grounds of urgency are mentioned in the accompanying Petition.

Yours Faithfully

Drawn &Filed by:

Place: New Delhi

Dated:

_______________________________

ADVOCATES AND LEGAL CONSULTANTS

________________________________,

NEW DELHI-110014.

PHONE: +___________________

EMAIL: ____________________________

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

CRL. MISC. MAIN NO._______ OF 2023.

IN THE MATTER OF:-

_____________________                             : PETITIONER

VERSUS

__________________________.        : RESPONDENTS

MEMO OF PARTIES

________________________________

Add: ________________________

,

New Delhi-110055.                                       : PETITIONER

VERSUS

1. _______________________________

2. _____________________________________

____________________________,

New Delhi.                                                    : RESPONDENTS

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Drawn &Filed by:

Place: New Delhi

Dated:

_____________________________

ADVOCATES AND LEGAL CONSULTANTS

_____________________________,

NEW DELHI-110014.

PHONE: +____________________

EMAIL: ___________________

SYNOPSIS

The Petitioner is constrained to impugn the Order dated ____________ [“the Impugned Order”] passed by the Ld. Sessions Judge, Saket Courts, New Delhi in Crl. Revision no.____________ [“the Appellate Court”] to the extent of its directives retaining the charge u/s 354/354A of IPC framed by the Ld. Trial Court of Ms. Saloni Singh; Ld. M.M. (Mahila Court), South Dist., Saket Courts Complex, New Delhi [“the Ld. Trial Court”] in FIR No._______________registered with P.S.: Saket in case titled as “________ Vs _______”against the Petitioner vide the Impugned Order.

That the Ld. Sessions Court vide the Impugned Orderwas pleased to accept the submissions of the Petitioner in part and vide the said impugned order of the even date itself, the Ld. Sessions Court was pleased to modify the Ld. Trial Court’s Order by directing deletion of charge under Section 354D IPC. However, the Ld. Sessions Court vide the Impugned Order wholly erred in retaining the charge U/s 354/354A IPC against the Petitioner and directing continuance of the Trial against the Petitioner, which has resulted in grave injustice and harassment to the Petitioner.

That from the bare perusal of the chargesheet it is evident that the erroneous continuance of Trial pertains to a ‘single alleged incident on _________’.  In the conspectus of the facts so alleged in the FIR and in light of the material information/evidence so collected and filed along with the Charge Sheet before the Ld. Trial Court, the ingredients of Section 354/354A are wholly not attracted and that legal proceedings against the Petitioner deserve a quietus. The Impugned Order is manifestly erroneous, arbitrary and deserves to be set aside on the following ground:

A.   THAT BARE READING OF ALLEGATIONS IN THE FIR QUA ‘THE ALLEGED SOLE INCIDENT DATED __________’ WOULD CATEGORICALLY SHOW THAT NO CASE, WHATSOEVER U/S 354/354A IS MADE OUT AGAINST THE PETITIONER:

The relevant excerpt from the FIR is extracted herein:

“On _____________, ______________ “again” demanded that I get a picture clicked with him,he came very close to me and put his arms around me for clicking the picture. I immediately pushed him, and I scolded him.”

Logical coherence from the said extracted content read in light of the materials on record with the charge-sheet would fortress that no case whatsoever is made out against the Petitioner. The crucial pointers include: 

i.            That the Respondent No.2 herself used the word “again”, which fortifies the narrative that by her own admissions even in the past, the Petitioner had got the pictures clicked with the Respondent No.2. In any case, if pictures have been clicked in the past, it cannot be termed as ‘unwelcome’ and ‘explicit sexual overtures’. It is further submitted that on perusal of the pictures filed by the Petitioner along with the present petition, it is evident that on all previous occasions when the Petitioner and Respondent No.2 have met for consultation and have got pictures clicked together, the conduct of the Petitioner was decent and chivalrous and further the Respondent No.2 is happy and contended with the Petitioner and there is not a single sign of hesitation or discomfort on the face of it. Thus,it is apparent on the face of it that the FIR is a false and concocted story and there was no reason/motive/chance for the Petitioner to misbehaviorcommit act involving unwelcome and explicit sexual overtures as alleged in a single isolated incident of ______________.

ii.          Furthermore, it is an admitted position of the Respondent No.2 in the narrative that any physical act so alleged was for the purpose of clicking picture only. Admittedly, no allegation of sexual overtures pertaining to the said act are buttressed and thus continuance of the case would be against the interest of justice.

iii.        Further it is an admitted stand that the Respondent No.2 never objected to the Petitioner to click picture with her nor is it a case that some force was used to click the picture without the consent of the Respondent No.2. Thus, it can be safely presumed that the physical contact and advances [which is an essential ingredient of 354A(1)(i)] were made with the consent and approval of the Respondent No.2.

iv.        Without Prejudice, even considering the false and bald allegations of the Respondent No.2 as gospel truth, even in that case putting an arm around to click a picture, even by far stretch of imagination does not not any mala fide intentions to outrage the modesty of the women or for that matter be considered as advancesinvolving unwelcome and explicit sexual overtures, especially when the person (Respondent no.2) is a known and familiar persons, with whom many pictures have been clicked in past and further there is a healthy conversation with the said person.

Thus, even on the basis of the allegation so leveled against the Petitioner, it can safely be presumed that no ingredient of the Section 354 or 354A is present in the said alleged incident and thus no case is made out against the Petitioner.

B.     RESPONDENT NO.2’ ACT OF HERSELF OR THROUGH HER OFFICE STAFF CALLING THE PETITIONER AROUND 76 TIMES A DURING THE PERIOD _________ [DATE OF ALLEGED INCIDENT] TILL ___________ IS A TESTAMENT OF THE FACT THAT THE NARRATIVE PAINTED IN THE FIR IS NOT ONLY FALSE BUT AN AFTERTHOUGHT AND TO SETTLE SCORES WITH THE PETITIONER:

Respondent No.2 (herself or through her staff) had called the Petitioner, a total number of 76 times. It is an admitted case based on the call records filed along with the charge sheet that the Respondent No.2 called the Petitioner a good number of 76 times; out of which the Petitioner responded to only 49 calls. All this in the intervening period between the date of alleged incident i. e between ________ till ________ when the FIR had been filed. The said act itself makes the allegation of the Respondent No.2 as false and concocted.

C.   FIR WAS FILED AFTER A DELAY OF 61 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF HAPPENING OF THE ALLEGED INCIDENT

It is pertinent to note that the Respondent No.2 is a well-qualified and established doctor and was well aware about her rights.  That admittedly no complaint or FIR or PCR call was made immediately after the happening of the alleged event dated ______, nor was there any email, message or any other conversation/correspondence on the part of the Respondent No.2 or her office qua the happening of the said alleged event or for that matter not even any warning being issued to the Petitioner. It is to be noted that the Complaint was filed on _______ much after the alleged event. It is a false and concocted narrative being put forth by the Respondent No.2 as an afterthought/counterblast as the Petitioner had issued a notice to the Respondent qua the deficiency of services being provided by her and further asking compensation for the said deficiency of service.

D.     RESPONDENT NO.2’S ACT OF HERSELF CALLING THE PETITIONER FROM HER PHONE NUMBER OR FROM THE PHONE NUMBER OF HER OFFICE STAFF IN THE WEE HOURS OF _________ I.E., AT ______ AM AND THAT TOO JUST AFTER ONE (1) DAY OF THE ALLEGED INCIDENT PUNCTURES THE VEIL OF THE FIR:

The Respondent No.2 on _________ itself i.e. after a day of the alleged incident called the Petitioner at _______vide her mobile number ________. Again, such a call immediately after one (1) day of the incident and that too at such odd hour speaks volumes about the self-serving allegations and untenability of the same as alleged in the FIR.

E.   RESPONDENT NO.2’S ACT OF SENDING PLEASANT MESSAGE TO THE PETITIONER IMMEDIATELY ON _________ I. E AFTER 2 DAYS OF THE ALLEGED INCIDENT IS ALSO A TESTAMENT OF THE FACT THAT NO SUCH INCIDENT COULD HAVE TAKEN PLACE:

That on _________, the Respondent No.2 sent a message-

“Good morning. Have a cheerful day” to the Petitioner.

It is quite untenable that in case an alleged incident as enumerated in the FIR had happened on _________; it is incomprehensible as to why the Respondent No.2 would send such greetings to the Petitioner two days after on ________. Such evident and self-speaking facts/evidence do not require trial and are sufficient to demolish the false narrative attempted to be painted by the Respondent No.2.

F.      THE FSL REPORT FURTHER CATEGORICALLY AND UNEQUIVOCALLY EXONERATES THE PETITIONER FROM THE ALLEGATIONS LEVELLED IN THE FIR:

That, it is an admitted case that even pursuant to the scrutiny of the Petitioner’s mobile phone by the FSL, no obscene material/chats have come out in order to fortress liability under the Penal Code. That, such crucial piece of evidence collected by the Prosecution itself has been ignored by the Ld. Sessions Court. It is pertinent to note that in order to falsely implicate the Petitioner as well as in order to further extort money from him and save herself from paying compensation to the Petitioner qua the deficiency of service, the Respondent No.2 had further falsely claimed that there were various pics of the Respondent No.2 in the phone of the Petitioner. The said allegation does not stand on its footings after the report of the FSL qua the contents of the mobile phone of the Petitioner.

G.  THAT AS PER COLUMN 13 OF THE CHARGESHEET THE ONLY MATERIAL WITNESS IS THE RESPONDENT NO.2 I.E. COMPLAINANT ITSELF.

It is trite to mention that none of the staff of the Respondent No.2 has confirmed the happening to the alleged incident neither any proof/evidence in the form of picture or CCTV footage of the said alleged incident been filed on record along with the chargesheet. It is submitted that the factum that none of the staff of the Respondent No.2 confirmed/approved/established the false narrative of the Respondent No.2 speaks volumes about the genuinety and authenticity of the claims of the Respondent No.2.

It is further submitted that the courts below have failed to appreciate that no supporting proof or substantial evidence or statement of any material witness is there in order to prove the claims of the Respondent No.2 and on this count only the Ld. Trial Court should had exonerated the Petitioner from this false case, which is made to harass the Petitioner and is nothing by an arm twisting tactic of the Respondent No.2 to save herself from her liability of compensation qua the deficiency of services provided by her.

LIST OF DATES:-

Nov. ___               That on/around _____, _____, the Petitioner was approached by Respondent No.2’s clinic enticing him to register for their tummy tuck and face lifting programme and on/around_____________, the Petitioner visited the Clinic and consulted with the Respondent No.2 after paying requisite consultation fee.

__________          That after being enamored by their false and pretentious representations, the Petitioner undertook the Liposuction Surgery and paid INR _______/- [____________] for which the Petitioner had been given a receipt.

_______ to

__________          The Petitioner was regularly called for consultations almost every week and had to shell INR _____ for every visit. Pertinent to note that even after spending a huge amount, the Petitioner did not get the desired relief. Thereafter, the Petitioner was further enticed to undergo an advanced procedure for which, the Petitioner was further asked to spend around INR ______.

_________            That the Petitioner enticed and lured by vivid representations of fulfillment of desired results further underwent advanced surgical procedure and shelved out further INR _______on ___________.  Thereafter, under the guise of post-operative care and procedures, the Petitioner was again called for frequent visits and was further compelled to spend INR _____(approx.) for post operative care and INR _____/- as consultation for every visit.

_______                That on _________, the Petitioner was further enticed to undergo treatment for Gynecomastia/ ‘Male Breasts related’ issues. The Petitioner came to the Clinic and again consulted the Respondent No.2. Accordingly, the Petitioner was given an estimate of INR _________ for the said medical treatment. Admittedly, the Petitioner refused the treatment, which didn’t go well with the Respondent No.2. The Petitioner further reiterated his complaint that the erstwhile ‘liposuction procedures’ for which the Petitioner has already spent INR more than ________, also hasn’t given desired results. Accordingly, the Petitioner declined further medical procedure, which involved further investment of _________. This, of course irked the Respondent No.2 for obvious financial reasons.

_________            That on/around _______, the Petitioner had been in constant touch and regularly conversing with Respondent No.2. In fact, vide the conversation as duly recorded in the charge sheet, the Petitioner again complained about percolating of ‘swelling’ on his face and abdomen and also inquired to get receipt of INR ______ paid way back in ____,_____ as the same were required for audit purposes. In response, the Respondent No.2 stated that it will take 3-6 months before the swelling gets settled. Admittedly, the demand of cash receipt of INR _________ discomforted the Respondent No.2.

_________            It is an admitted case that even up till onset of _______, the swelling, discomfort owing the re-constructive surgeries undergone by the Petitioner at the Respondent No.2’s clinic did not wither away and inspite of attempting to amicably sort out the issues, the Petitioner didn’t receive encouraging response at the behest of Respondent No.2 and her clinic.         

___________        That left with no other option, the Petitioner sent a legal notice dated __________ [“the Legal Notice”] to Respondent No.2 seeking damages to the tune of INR _______ as the neither the pain nor swelling as an outcome of surgical procedures seemed to subside.

_______                That as a counterblast to the Legal Notice, the Respondent No.2 in a nefarious manner and in order to levy pressure upon the Petitioner filed the present FIR. The narrative/version of the Respondent No.2 falls flat on the ground basis her subsequent conduct, which is explained hereinunder:

It is an admitted case that in a span of less than ____________ [i.e from ___________ till __________], the Respondent No.2 called the Petitioner more than 76 times vide her own number or through the number of her staff members.

_________            That on/around __________, the Chargesheet had been filed before the Ld. Trial Court.

_____                    That on/around, the Supplementary Chargesheet had been filed and the FSL report qua the Petitioner’s mobile phone was brought on record. The FSL report further categorically and unequivocally exonerates the Petitioner from the allegations levelled in the FIR.

______                  That on ______, vide an arbitrary and unreasonable order dated _______ [“the Trial Court Order”], the Ld. Trial Court had framed charges against the Petitioner u/s 354A(1)(i), u/s354A(1)(iv) and 354D IPC. The Trial Court Order failed to appreciate the charge sheet holistically and even failed to fathom the significance of conduct of the Respondent No.2 in form of calls and messages and that too immediately after the date of alleged incident. Furthermore, the Court failed to fathom that even by bare perusal of the FIR, no such ingredients of the alleged offences are made out. Furthermore, even the written submissions so filed by the Petitioner weren’t taken into consideration by the Ld. Trial Court.

________              That a Revision Petition on/around ________ impugning the Ld. Trial Court Order had been preferred by the Petitioner before the District and Sessions Courts, Saket Courts, New Delhi [“the Sessions Court”] interalia highlighting the shortcomings of the Ld. Trial Court Order, which are as follows:

a.     Non-consideration and non-application of mind over the substantive contents of the charge sheet

b.    Non consideration of the call records and admitted social media conversations for the time period [ranging from _________ to __________] which squarely prove that the FIR is an afterthought and was to intimidate the Petitioner from pursuing his claim for damages as conveyed through legal notice dated ____________.

c.     Non-consideration of evidence procured and brought on record by the Prosecution.

__________          That the Ld. Sessions Court vide order dated ___________ [“the Impugned Order”]was pleased to accept the submissions in part and vide order of the even date was pleased to modify the Ld. Trial Court’s Order by directing deletion of charge under Section 354D, IPC. However, for the rest of the Sections, the Ld. Sessions Court erred in directing continuance of the Trial.

__________          :         Hence, the present Petition.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

CRL. MISC. MAIN NO._______ OF 2023.

IN THE MATTER OF:-

__________________

_______________,

New Delhi-110055.                                       : PETITIONER

VERSUS

______________________

Add:_____________,

New Delhi.                                                    : RESPONDENTS

CRIMINAL MISC. MAIN PETITION ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIAR/W SECTION 482 CRPC AGAINST THE IMPUGNEDORDER DATED ____________ PASSED BY THE LD. APPELLATE COURT OF SH. RAKESH KUMAR SINGH; LD. ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE; SOUTH DIST., SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI IN CRL. REVISION NO._______ IN CASE TITLED AS “ASHWANI KUMAR VS STATE”.

TO,

THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AND HIS COMPANION JUSTICES OF THIS HON'BLE HIGH COURT.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:-

1.              That the present petition has been filed by the Petitionerwho is constrained to approach this Hon’ble Court against the impugned order dated ___________ passed by the Ld. AppellateCourt of Sh. __________ Singh; Ld. Additional Sessions Judge; South Dist., Saket Courts, New Delhi in Crl. Revision no._______ in case titled as “___________ Vs _______” (hereinafter referred to as the “Impugned Order”), the Ld. Appellate Court passed impugned Order to the extent of its directives retaining the charge U/s 354/354A of IPC in FIR No. __________ P.S.: Saket against the Petitioner.

A copy of the impugned Order dated ______ passed by the Ld. Appellate Court is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure P-1.

2.              That the Petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned order passed by the Ld. Appellate Court, which is without merits and has been passed in an arbitrary and prejudiced manner by the Ld. Appellate Court as the Ld. Trial Court failed to appreciate the submission of the Petitioner. Nevertheless, the Ld. Appellate Court passed the impugned order without applying its judicial mind and law laid down by various Hon’ble Courts.

3.              That brief factual narrative essential for the present petition:

3.1     That on/around ___________, the Petitioner was approached by Respondent No.2’s clinic enticing him to register for their tummy tuck and face lifting programme and on/around __________, the Petitioner visited the Clinic and consulted with the Respondent No.2 after paying the requisite consultation fee.

3.2     That after being enamored by their false and pretentious representations, the Petitioner undertook the Liposuction Surgery and paid INR _______/- [ __________ ] for which the Petitioner had been given a receipt.

3.3     The Petitioner was regularly called for consultations almost every week and had to shell INR ______ for every visit. Pertinent to note that even after spending a huge amount, the Petitioner did not get the desired relief. Thereafter, the Petitioner was further enticed to undergo an advanced procedure for which, the Petitioner was further asked to spend around __________.

3.5     That the Petitioner enticed and lured by vivid representations of fulfilment of desired results further underwent advanced surgical procedure and shelved out further INR _____ on _________.  Thereafter, under the guise of post-operative care and procedures, the Petitioner was again called for frequent visits and was further compelled to spend INR __________ for post operative care and INR _______/- as consultation for every visit.

3.6     That on ______, the Petitioner was further enticed to undergo treatment for Gynecomastia/ ‘Male Breasts related’ issues. The Petitioner came to the Clinic and again consulted the Respondent No.2. Accordingly, the Petitioner was given an estimate of INR 5 lakhs for the said medical treatment. Admittedly, the Petitioner refused the treatment, which didn’t go well with the Respondent No.2. The Petitioner further reiterated his complaint that the erstwhile ‘liposuction procedures’ for which the Petitioner has already spent INR more than________ also hasn’t given desired results. Accordingly, the Petitioner declined further medical procedure, which involved further investment of INR _____. This, of course irked the Respondent No.2 for obvious financial reasons.

3.7     That on/around ________, the Petitioner had been in constant touch and regularly conversing with Respondent No.2. In fact, vide the conversation as duly recorded in the charge sheet, the Petitioner again complained about percolating of ‘swelling’ on his face and abdomen and also inquired to get receipt of INR ______ paid way back in June,2016 as the same were required for audit purposes. In response, the Respondent No.2 stated that it will take _________ before the swelling gets settled. Admittedly, the demand of cash receipt of INR________ discomforted the Respondent No.2. It is an admitted case that even up till onset of ______, the swelling, discomfort owing the re-constructive surgeries undergone by the Petitioner at the Respondent No.2’s clinic did not wither away and inspite of attempting to amicably sort out the issues, the Petitioner didn’t receive encouraging response at the behest of Respondent No.2 and her clinic.

3.8     That left with no other option, the Petitioner sent a legal notice dated ________ [“the Legal Notice”] to Respondent No.2 seeking damages to the tune of INR ______ as the neither the pain nor swelling as an outcome of surgical procedures seemed to subside. 

The copy of the Legal Notice dated ______ is attached herein as Annexure P-2.

3.9     That as a counterblast to the Legal Notice, the Respondent No.2 in a nefarious manner and in order to levy pressure upon the Petitioner filed the present FIR. The narrative/version of the Respondent No.2 falls flat on the ground basis her subsequent conduct, which is explained hereinunder:

Copy of FIR bearing _________ U/s 354A/354D of IPC P.S.: Saket is attached herein as Annexure P-3.

It is an admitted case that in a span of less than 2 months [i.e from ______ till _____ ], the Respondent No.2 called the Petitioner more than 76 times through her own phone number or from the phone number of her staff members. The crucial details pertaining to the said incoming calls from the Petitioner interalia include:

a.    Respondent No.2’ act of herself calling the Petitioner around 76 times a during the period _________ [date of alleged incident] till _____________ is a testament of the fact that the narrative painted in the FIR is an afterthought and to settle scores with the Petitioner:

Respondent No.2 had called the Petitioner, a total number of 76 times through her own phone number or from the phone number of her staff members. It is an admitted case based on the call records filed along with the charge sheet that the Respondent No.2 called the Petitioner a good number of 76 times; out of which the Petitioner responded to only 49 calls. All this in the intervening period between the date of alleged incident i. e between __________ till ____ when the FIR had been filed.

b.    Respondent No.2’s act of sending pleasant message to the Petitioner immediately on ______ i.e after 2 days of the alleged incident is also a testament of the fact that no such incident could have taken place:

That on __________, the Respondent No.2 sent a message-

“Good morning. Have a cheerful day” to the Petitioner.

It is quite untenable that in case an alleged incident as enumerated in the FIR had happened on __________; it is incomprehensible as to why the Respondent No.2 would send such greetings to the Petitioner two days after on ____________. Such evident and self-speaking facts/evidence do not require trial and are sufficient to demolish the false narrative attempted to be painted by the Respondent No.2.

c.     Respondent No.2’s act of herself calling the Petitioner in the wee hours of _________ i.e., at ______ and that too just after one (1) day of the alleged incident punctures the veil of the FIR:

The Respondent No.2 on _________ itself i.e after a day of the alleged incident called the Petitioner at _______ vide her mobile number _______. Again, such a call immediately after one (1) day of the incident and that too at such odd hour speaks volumes about the self-serving allegations and untenability of the same as alleged in the FIR.

3.10   That on/around _______, the Chargesheet had been filed before the Ld. Trial Court.

The copy of the relevant excerpt of the Charge sheet is attached herein as Annexure P-4.

3.11   That on/around, the Supplementary Chargesheet had been filed and the FSL report qua the Petitioner’s mobile phone was brought on record. The FSL report further categorically and unequivocally exonerates the Petitioner from the allegations levelled in the FIR.

The copy of the relevant excerpt of the Supplementary Charge sheet along with the call record and the FSL Report is attached herein as Annexure P-5[Colly]

3.11   That on ___________, vide an arbitrary and unreasonable order dated __________ [“the Trial Court Order”], the Ld. Trial Court had framed charges against the Petitioner u/s 354A(1)(i), u/s354A(1)(iv) and 354D IPC. The Trial Court Order failed to appreciate the charge sheet holistically and even failed to fathom the significance of conduct of the Respondent No.2 in form of calls and messages and that too immediately after the date of alleged incident. Furthermore, the Court failed to fathom that even by bare perusal of the FIR, no such ingredients of the alleged offences are made out. Furthermore, even the written submissions so filed by the Petitioner weren’t taken into consideration by the Ld. Trial Court.

The copy of the Ld. Trial Court’s Order dated _____________ is attached herein as Annexure P-6.

4.            That a Revision Petition on/around ___________ impugning the Ld. Trial Court Order had been preferred by the Petitioner before the District and Sessions Courts, Saket Courts, New Delhi [“the Sessions Court”]interalia highlighting the shortcomings of the Ld. Trial Court Order, which are as follows:

a.     Non-consideration and non-application of mind over the substantive contents of the charge sheet.

b.    Non consideration of the call records and admitted social media conversations for the time period [ranging from ______ to ______ ] which squarely prove that the FIR is an afterthought and was to intimidate the Petitioner from pursuing his claim for damages as conveyed through legal notice dated ______ .

c.     Non-consideration of evidence procured and brought on record by the Prosecution.

The copy of the Revision Petition bearing no.______ filed by the petitioner is attached herein as Annexure P-7.

5.            That the Ld. Sessions Court vide order dated _____________ [“the Impugned Order”] was pleased to accept the submissions in part and vide order of the even date was pleased to modify the Ld. Trial Court’s Order by directing deletion of charge under Section 354D, IPC. However, for the rest of the Sections, the Ld. Sessions Court erred in directing continuance of the Trial. The Impugned Order is manifestly erroneous, arbitrary and deserves to be set aside on the following grounds interalia as under:

GROUNDS:-

A.             THAT BARE READING OF ALLEGATIONS IN THE FIR QUA ‘THE ALLEGED SOLE INCIDENT DATED ________’ WOULD CATEGORICALLY SHOW THAT NO CASE, WHATSOEVER U/S 354/354A IS MADE OUT AGAINST THE PETITIONER:

The relevant excerpt from the FIR is extracted herein:

“On _______, ________ “again” demanded that I get a picture clicked with him,he came very close to me and put his arms around me for clicking the picture. I immediately pushed him, and I scolded him.”

Logical coherence from the said extracted content read in light of the materials on record with the charge-sheet would fortress that no case whatsoever is made out against the Petitioner. The crucial pointers include: 

i.                That the Respondent No.2 herself used the word “again”, which fortifies the narrative that by her own admissions even in the past, the Petitioner had got the pictures clicked with the Respondent No.2. In any case, if pictures have been clicked in the past, it cannot be termed as ‘unwelcome’ and ‘explicit sexual overtures’. It is further submitted that on perusal of the pictures filed by the Petitioner along with the present petition, it is evident that on all previous occasions when the Petitioner and Respondent No.2 have met for consultation and have got pictures clicked together, the conduct of the Petitioner was decent and chivalrous and further the Respondent No.2 is happy and contended with the Petitioner and there is not a single sign of hesitation or discomfort on the face of it. Thus, it is apparent on the face of it that the FIR is a false and concocted story and there was no reason/motive/chance for the Petitioner to misbehavior commit act involving unwelcome and explicit sexual overtures as alleged in a single isolated incident of ___________

ii.          Furthermore, it is an admitted position of the Respondent No.2 in the narrative that any physical act so alleged was for the purpose of clicking picture only. Admittedly, no allegation of sexual overtures pertaining to the said act are buttressed and thus continuance of the case would be against the interest of justice.

iii.        Further it is an admitted stand that the Respondent No.2 never objected to the Petitioner to click picture with her nor is it a case that some force was used to click the picture without the consent of the Respondent No.2. Thus, it can be safely presumed that the physical contact and advances [which is an essential ingredient of 354A(1)(i)] were made with the consent and approval of the Respondent No.2.

iv.        Without Prejudice, even considering the false and bald allegations of the Respondent No.2 as gospel truth, even in that case putting an arm around to click a picture, even by far stretch of imagination does not not any mala fide intentions to outrage the modesty of the women or for that matter be considered as advances involving unwelcome and explicit sexual overtures, specially when the person (Respondent no.2) is a known and familiar persons, with whom many pictures have been clicked in past and further there is a healthy conversation with the said person. 

Thus, even on the basis of the allegation so leveled against the Petitioner, it can safely be presumed that no ingredient of the Section 354 or 354A is present in the said alleged incident and thus no case is made out against the Petitioner.

B.     RESPONDENT NO.2’ ACT OF HERSELF OR THROUGH HER OFFICE STAFF CALLING THE PETITIONER AROUND 76 TIMES A DURING THE PERIOD ________ [DATE OF ALLEGED INCIDENT] TILL ______ IS A TESTAMENT OF THE FACT THAT THE NARRATIVE PAINTED IN THE FIR IS NOT ONLYFALSE BUT AN AFTERTHOUGHT AND TO SETTLE SCORES WITH THE PETITIONER:

Respondent No.2 (herself or through her staff) had called the Petitioner, a total number of 76 times. It is an admitted case based on the call records filed along with the charge sheet that the Respondent No.2 called the Petitioner a good number of 76 times; out of which the Petitioner responded to only 49 calls. All this in the intervening period between the date of alleged incident i. e between _____ till ______ when the FIR had been filed. The said act itself makes the allegation of the Respondent No.2 as false and concocted.

C.   FIR WAS FILED AFTER A DELAY OF 61 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF HAPPENING OF THE ALLEGED INCIDENT

It is pertinent to note that the Respondent No.2 is a well-qualified and established doctor and was well aware about her rights.  That admittedly no complaint or FIR or PCR call was made immediately after the happening of the alleged event dated ________, nor was there any email, message or any other conversation/correspondence on the part of the Respondent No.2 or her office qua the happening of the said alleged event or for that matter not even any warning being issued to the Petitioner. It is to be noted that the Complaint was filed on __________ much after the alleged event. It is a false and concocted narrative being put forth by the Respondent No.2 as an afterthought/counterblast as the Petitioner had issued a notice to the Respondent qua the deficiency of services being provided by her and further asking compensation for the said deficiency of service.

D.    RESPONDENT NO.2’S ACT OF HERSELF CALLING THE PETITIONER FROM HER PHONE NUMBER OR FROM THE PHONE NUMBER OF HER OFFICE STAFF IN THE WEE HOURS OF _______ I.E., AT _____ AM AND THAT TOO JUST AFTER ONE (1) DAY OF THE ALLEGED INCIDENT PUNCTURES THE VEIL OF THE FIR:

The Respondent No.2 on ________ itself i.e. after a day of the alleged incident called the Petitioner at _______ vide her mobile number _____________. Again, such a call immediately after one (1) day of the incident and that too at such odd hour speaks volumes about the self-serving allegations and untenability of the same as alleged in the FIR.

E.   RESPONDENT NO.2’S ACT OF SENDING PLEASANT MESSAGE TO THE PETITIONER IMMEDIATELY ON ____________ I. E AFTER 2 DAYS OF THE ALLEGED INCIDENT IS ALSO A TESTAMENT OF THE FACT THAT NO SUCH INCIDENT COULD HAVE TAKEN PLACE:

That on _________, the Respondent No.2 sent a message-

“Good morning. Have a cheerful day” to the Petitioner.

It is quite untenable that in case an alleged incident as enumerated in the FIR had happened on ________; it is incomprehensible as to why the Respondent No.2 would send such greetings to the Petitioner two days after on ______. Such evident and self-speaking facts/evidence do not require trial and are sufficient to demolish the false narrative attempted to be painted by the Respondent No.2.

F.     THE FSL REPORT FURTHER CATEGORICALLY AND UNEQUIVOCALLY EXONERATES THE PETITIONER FROM THE ALLEGATIONS LEVELLED IN THE FIR:

That, it is an admitted case that even pursuant to the scrutiny of the Petitioner’s mobile phone by the FSL, no obscene material/chats have come out in order to fortress liability under the Penal Code. That, such crucial piece of evidence collected by the Prosecution itself has been ignored by the Ld. Sessions Court. It is pertinent to note that in order to falsely implicate the Petitioner as well as in order to further extort money from him and save herself from paying compensation to the Petitioner qua the deficiency of service, the Respondent No.2 had further falsely claimed that there were various pics of the Respondent No.2 in the phone of the Petitioner. The said allegation does not stand on its footings after the report of the FSL qua the contents of the mobile phone of the Petitioner.

G.        THAT AS PER COLUMN 13 OF THE CHARGESHEET THE ONLY MATERIAL WITNESS IS THE RESPONDENT NO.2 I.E. COMPLAINANT ITSELF.

It is trite to mention that none of the staff of the Respondent No.2 has confirmed the happening to the alleged incident neither any proof/evidence in the form of picture or cctv footage of the said alleged incident been filed on record along with the chargesheet. It is submitted that the factum that none of the staff of the Respondent No.2 confirmed/approved/established the false narrative of the Respondent No.2 speaks volumes about the genuinety and authenticity of the claims of the Respondent No.2.

It is further submitted that the courts below have failed to appreciate that no supporting proof or substantial evidence or statement of any material witness is there in order to prove the claims of the Respondent No.2 and on this count only the Ld. Trial Court should had exonerated the Petitioner from this false case, which is made to harass the Petitioner and is nothing by an arm twisting tactic of the Respondent No.2 to save herself from her liability of compensation qua the deficiency of services provided by her.

6.            That the Petitionersubmits that she have no other equal or efficacious remedy other than to approach this Hon’ble Court by way of the present petition.

7.            That it is submitted that the Petitioner has not filed any other petition against the impugned order dated ______ passed by Ld. Appellate Court.

8.            That the Petitioner is approaching this Hon’ble Court without any delay on its part and the petition is within the period of limitation.

PRAYER:-

          In the light of the above-mentioned submissions it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:

(i)             Allow the present petition and set aside impugned order dated ______ passed by the Ld. Appellate Court of ______________; Ld. Additional Sessions Judge; South Dist., Saket Courts, New Delhi in Crl. Revision no.___________ in case titled as “Ashwani Kumar Vs State”.

(ii)           Call the Ld. Trial Court Record of Ld. M.M. (Mahila Court), South Dist., Saket Courts Complex, New Delhi in FIR No._________ U/s 354A/354D of IPC P.S.: Saket, case titled as “_______Vs ______”.

(iii)         Pass any other relief which this Hon’ble Court thinks fit in favour of the Opposite Party may be passed.      

PETITIONER

Place: New Delhi

Dated:                    THROUGH

______________________

ADVOCATES AND LEGAL CONSULTANTS

_________________________,

NEW DELHI-110014.

PHONE: __________________

EMAIL: ____________________

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

CRL. MISC. MAIN NO._______ OF 2023.

IN THE MATTER OF:-

__________________                                   : PETITIONER

VERSUS

__________________                         : RESPONDENTS

AFFIDAVIT

Affidavit of Mr. __________  S/o Sh.___________, aged about ___ years, R/o _________________, New Delhi-110055, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:

1.       That I am the Petitioner in the above mentioned petition and I am well conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case and also therefore, competent to swear this affidavit.

2.       That I state that I have read over and understood the contents of the above-mentioned petition under Article 226/227 of Constitution of India R/w Section 482 CrPC from Para Nos. _____ to _____ at page Nos. _____ to _____ instructions and the averments made therein have been read and understood by me. I further state that the averments made therein are true and correct to my knowledge and belief.

3.       That the Annexures filed along with this petition are true copies of their respective originals.

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION:-

Verified at New Delhi on this ___ day of September, 2023 that the contents of the above Affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and no part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed there from.

DEPONENT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

CRL.M. APP. NO.______ OF 2023.

IN

CRL. MISC. MAIN NO._______ OF 2023.

IN THE MATTER OF:-

_____________________                             : PETITIONER

V E R S U S

______________________                 : RESPONDENTS

APPLICATION FOR AN ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE SEEKING EXEMPTION FROM FILING CERTIFIED, LEGIBLE AND DEEM TYPED COPY OF THE ANNEXURES AS FILED ALONG WITH THE PETITION.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH :-

1.              That the Present Application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the Petitioner seeking exemption from filing certified copy of the annexures filed along with the petition.

2.              It is stated that the Petitioner is in the process of obtaining the clear typed copies/ certified copies of the annexures and also seeking exemption from filing legible, deem, typed copy of annexures along with present petition.

3.              It is stated that the Petitioner undertake to file the same as soon as they are obtained.

4.              It is stated that this application is Bonafide and in the interest of justice.

PRAYER:-

          In the light of the above-mentioned submissions it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:

(i)       Exempt from filing the clean typed copies/ certified of the annexures appended with the accompanying petition; and

(ii)     Pass any other directions / orders which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the light of facts and circumstances of the present case.

PETITIONER

Place: New Delhi

Dated:                    THROUGH

______________________

ADVOCATES AND LEGAL CONSULTANTS

________________________________,

NEW DELHI-110014.

PHONE: __________________

EMAIL: ______________________

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

CRL. M. APP. NO.______ OF 2023.

IN

CRL. MISC. MAIN NO._______ OF 2023.

IN THE MATTER OF:-

____________________                               : PETITIONER

V E R S U S

_______________________                         : RESPONDENTS

AFFIDAVIT

Affidavit of Mr. _____________S/o Sh. _____________, aged about ___ years, R/o ___________________, New Delhi-110055, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:

1.              That I am the Petitionerin the aforesaid petition and I am well conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case and also therefore, competent to swear this affidavit.

2.              That the submissions as to facts made in the accompanying Application under Section 482 of CrPC seeking exemption from filing certified copy has been drafted by my counsel as per my instructions and the facts are true and correct. The same may be read as part and parcel of this affidavit, which are not repeated here for the sake of brevity.

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION:-

Verified at New Delhi on this ____ day September, 2023 that the contents of above affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and, nothing material has been concealed therefrom.   

DEPONENT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

CRL.M. APP. NO.______ OF 2023.

IN

CRL. MISC. MAIN NO._______ OF 2023.

IN THE MATTER OF:-

__________________                                   : PETITIONER

V E R S U S

__________________                         : RESPONDENTS

APPLICATION ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT / PETITIONER UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973, SEEKING STAY OF THE PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE THE LD. TRIAL COURT OF MS. SALONI SINGH; LD. M.M. (MAHILA COURT), SOUTH DIST., SAKET COURTS COMPLEX, NEW DELHI IN FIR NO._______ U/S 354A/354D OF IPC P.S.: SAKET, CASE TITLED AS “__________ VS __________”.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1.              It is submitted that the Applicant / Petitioner has preferred the present Application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘Code / CrPC’) seeking stay of the proceedings pending before the Ld. Trial Court of__________________; Ld. M.M. (Mahila Court), South Dist., Saket Courts Complex, New Delhi in FIR __________ U/s 354A/354D of IPC P.S.: Saket, case titled as “________ Vs ________” (‘Impugned Order’).

2.              It is submitted that the accompanying Petition has been preferred by the Applicant/ Petitioner inter-alia seeking appropriate writ/ direction/order, thereby setting aside the Impugned Order. As such, the contents of the accompanying Petition may be read as part and parcel of the instant Application, being not repeated herein for the sake of brevity.

3.              It is submitted that the Impugned Order passed by the Ld. Appellate Court below fails to pass the muster of judicial reasoning hence, pending adjudication of the instant Petition, the Impugned Order deserves to be stayed by this Hon’ble High Court on this ground alone.

4.              It is additionally submitted that the Ld. Appellate Court below has in an arbitrary and high-handed manner, passed an impugned Order dated __________ in a cryptic manner, which is not only devoid of legal merits but has the propensity to cause irreparable loss and prejudice to the Petitioner as Impugned Order wholly erred in retaining the charge u/s 354/354A and directing continuance of the Trial against the Petitioner, which has resulted in grave injustice and harassment to the Petitioner, therefore it is prayed that the operation of the Impugned Order be stayed by this Hon’ble Court.

5.              It is further submitted that grave prejudice shall be caused to the Petitioner if the present Application is not allowed by this Hon’ble High Court.

6.              It is submitted that the present Application is bonafide and maybe allowed in the interests of justice.

PRAYER

In light of the aforementioned facts and circumstances, it is most humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:

a.       Stay the operation of the proceedings pending before the Ld. Trial Court of_______________; Ld. M.M. (Mahila Court), South Dist., Saket Courts Complex, New Delhi in FIR No.__________ U/s 354A/354D of IPC P.S.: Saket, case titled as “__________ Vs___________”till the pendency of the accompanying Petition.

b.       Pass any other order(s) as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.

DELHI                                                          PETITIONER

THROUGH

DATED

____________________

_____________________________,

NEW DELHI-110014

PHONE: ______________

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

CRL.M. APP. NO.______ OF 2023.

IN

CRL. MISC. MAIN NO._______ OF 2023.

IN THE MATTER OF:-

____________________                               : PETITIONER

V E R S U S

_________________                                     : RESPONDENTS

AFFIDAVIT

Affidavit of Mr. _____________S/o Sh____________, aged about ___ years, R/o____________, ___________, New Delhi-110055, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:

1.       That I, the deponent, am the Petitioner in the above captioned case and am well conversant with the facts and circumstances of the present petition and hence I’m competent to swear the present affidavit.

2.       That the accompanying application has been drafted by my counsel under my instructions and the contents of the same have been duly read over and explained to me. After fully understanding the same, I say that the contents of the application are true and correct.

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION :-

Verified at Delhi on this ___ day of September, 2023. 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