ex / 56 / 14 archi bhardwaj vs. manish kaushik malviya...

EX / 56 / 14 ARCHI BHARDWAJ Vs. MANISH KAUSHIK Malviya Nagar19.02.2016

Present: None for the DH.

Sh. Sunil Devadi Counsel for JD.

Affidavit filed by the JD in terms of last order.

Extra copy retained on record to be given to the DH against the

acknowledgment.

To come up with the connected matter on 09.05.2016.

(Pooja Aggarwal) MM02 (Mahila Court), South

Saket Courts/N.D./19.02.2016

EX / 12/15 / 15 KAMLESH AND ORS Vs. RAJESH KUMAR Sangam Vihar19.02.2016

Present: Sh. Naveen Kumar Jha proxy counsel for DH.

Warrants of arrest received back unexecuted.

Record perused.

Similar report had been received on the warrants of attachment issued

earlier.

Issue fresh warrants of arrest against the JD for 22.04.2016.



EX / 48 / 14 LIPIKA DAVID & ORS Vs. VICTOR DAVID Safdarjung Enclave19.02.2016

Present: None.

Order dt. 09.10.2015 be complied with afresh for 22.04.2016.



CC / 316/1 / 15 MAYA DEVI Vs. SATYAPRAKASH AND ANR.Ambedkar Nagar19.02.2016

Present: Ms. Anastasia Ld. LAC for aggrieved with aggrieved.

Respondents in person.

Respondents submit that they have received complete set of documents.

They further submit that they have not engaged any advocate. They are referred to

DLSA office in room no. 309 for assistance, as per rules.

Reply, if any be filed on the NDOH with advance copy to the aggrieved.

Respondent no.1 is directed to file income affidavit in terms of

judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Kusum Sharma Vs. Mahender Kumar

Sharma dated 14.01.2015 on the NDOH, along with all relevant documents, with

advance copy to the aggrieved.

To come up for completion of pleadings/further proceedings on

21.03.2016.

Copy of this order given dasti to the respondents as per rules.



CC / 76/1 / 15 PRIYA Vs. SUBODH @ RUPESH & ORSSangam Vihar19.02.2016

Present: Sh. A S Rathore advocate ( enrollment no. D/174/94 ) on behalf of the aggrieved with aggrieved.Respondent no.1 in person.Memo of appearance on behalf of aggrieved be filed during the course

of the day. V/n be filed on the NDOH.Record perused.Passover request.Be awaited.


Saket Courts/N.D./19.02.2016at11.41 amPresent: Sh. A S Rathore Counsel for aggrieved with aggrieved.

Ms. Vandana Sharma Counsel for respondents with respondent no.1.Fresh V/n filed on behalf of the aggrieved as well as respondent no. 2,3

and 4. Same is taken on record.Income affidavit of both the parties is on record.Counsel for aggrieved submits he has a matter at Tiz Hazari at 12.00

noon and requests for an adjournment.Adjournment request is not opposed.To come up on 29.04.2016 for arguments on interim application.On request date is changed to 03.05.2016. It is made clear that no adjournment shall be granted for the NDOH.



EX / 25 / 15 RASHMI SHARMA Vs. DEEPAK SHARMA Sangam Vihar19.02.2016

Present: Sh. Rahul Jain Proxy counsel Ld. LAC for DH with DH.

None for the JD.

Subsequent to the issuance of notice, JD had entered the appearance on

23.10.2015.

List of movable property is on record.

Issue warrants of attachment of movable property of the JD for

07.04.2016.



FIR 411/13STATE Vs. SURESH KUMAR Safdarjung Enclave19.02.2016

Present: Sh. Ritendra Singh, Ld. APP for the State.Io is not present. Fresh notice be issued to the Io to appear in person on 31.03.2016.



FIR 1273/14STATE Vs. PRAVEEN & ORS. Hauz Khas19.02.2016

Present: None for the State.IO is not present.Challan u/s. 173 Cr.PC along with accompanying documents perused.Prima facie there is sufficient material on record to disclose

commission of offences under Section 323/354/506/509/34 IPC. Accordingly, cognizance is taken u/s. 190(1)(b) CrPC for offences under Section 323/354/506/509/34 IPC.

Issue summons to all three accused (in Col. No. 11) through IO and notice to their surety if any for 04.04.2016.



FIR 799/15STATE Vs. ROHTASH SINGH Safdarjung Enclave19.02.2016

Present: Sh. Ritendra Singh Ld. APP for State.

IO is not present.

Challan u/s. 173 Cr.PC along with accompanying documents perused.

Prima facie there is sufficient material on record to disclose

commission of offences under Section 354/354A/354D/323/506/509 IPC.

Accordingly, cognizance is taken u/s. 190(1)(b) CrPC for offences under Section

354/354A/354D/323/506/509 IPC.

Issue summons to accused Rohtash (in Col. No. 11) through IO and

notice to his surety if any for 05.04.2016.



FIR 1136/15STATE Vs. KAMAL SINGH BHATI Malviya Nagar19.02.2016


IO/HC Rajinder is present.

Heard. Challan u/s. 173 Cr.PC along with accompanying documents

perused.

Prima facie there is sufficient material on record to disclose

commission of cognizable offences u/s 323/354C/509 IPC and accordingly,

cognizance is taken u/s. 190(1)(b) CrPC for offences under u/s 323/354C/509 IPC.

Issue summons to the accused through IO and notice to his surety for

07.04.2016.



FIR 376/15STATE Vs. BADAL SINGH & ANR. Ambedkar Nagar19.02.2016


IO is not present.

Exemption request received from the IO. For reasons stated his

personal appearance is exempted only for today.

Issue notice to the SHO to submit a report regarding verification of age

of accused Akash in terms of submissions of the IO on 09.12.2015.

Notice be also issued to the IO for the NDOH i.e. 21.03.2016.



FIR 763/15STATE Vs. KAMALDEV Ambedkar Nagar19.02.2016

Present: Sh. Ritendra Singh Ld. APP for State.Sh. Akhilesh counsel for accused with accused Kamaldev. Fresh V/n filed on behalf of the accused. Same is taken on record.Accused has clarified that vide order dt. 10.08.2015 he had been granted

anticipatory bail and not regular court bail. He seeks time for filing the same.On request time is given.Be awaited.


Saket Courts/N.D./19.02.2016at01.25 pmPresent: Sh. Ritendra Singh Ld. APP for State.

Sh. Akhilesh counsel for accused with accused Kamaldev. An application u/s. 437 CrPC has been filed on behalf of the accused

for grant of bail. Heard on the application.In the facts and circumstances of the present case, whereby the accused

was already on anticipatory bail and the chargesheet has been filed, accused is admitted to Court bail subject to furnishing of personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/ with two sureties of the like amount subject to following conditions:

1. Accused shall appear on each date of hearing before the court;2. Accused shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is

suspected;3. Accused shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or

promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court ; and

4. Accused shall not leave the territory of India without seeking prior permission of the court.

Application disposed off accordingly.Personal bond and surety bond furnished, considered and accepted

subject to verification. Verification report be filed by the IO on NDOH. Intimation be

sent to concerned RTO and office.Complete set of challan and documents has been supplied to the

accused today in the court in compliance of Sec. 207 CrPC, against receipt.Application for supply of deficient documents if any be filed within one

week. List for arguments on charge on 22.04.2016.



FIR 425/13STATE Vs. PRAKASH KUMAR Ambedkar Nagar19.02.2016

Present: Sh. Ritendra Singh Ld. APP for State.Sh. D C Gautam counsel for accused with accused.Be awaited for arguments on charge.


Saket Courts/N.D./19.02.2016at 02.28 pmPresent: Sh. Ritendra Singh, Ld. APP for the State.

Sh. D P Shukla Counsel for accused with accused.

Accused submits that he does not wish to continue with Sh. D C

Gautam as his advocate accordingly v/n in favour of Sh. D C Gautam is discharged in

view of request of accused.

Fresh V/n filed on behalf of the accused. Same is taken on record.

Counsel seeks time to advance argument on charge stating he has been

engaged today itself.

On request one opportunity is given.

To come up on 06.05.2016 for arguments on charge.



FIR 564/14STATE Vs. SOBINDER & ORS Sangam Vihar19.02.2016


Sh. Vijay Singh counsel for accused with all four accused.

Fresh V/n filed on behalf of all the four accused. Same is taken on

record.

An application for cancellation of bail was filed by complainant on

15.02.2016. copy supplied to the accused.

Part arguments on the point of charge heard.

Ld. Counsel for accused seeks time for advance further arguments on

charge in view of the supplementary charge sheet.

Ld. APP also seeks assistance of both the investigating officer.

Issue notice to both the IOs for 23.03.2016.

Reply to the application of cancellation of bail of accused be filed by

the accused as well as IO on the NDOH.



FIR 39/13STATE Vs. RAJKUMAR & ORS. Sangam Vihar19.02.2016

Present: Sh. Ritendra Singh, Ld. APP for the State.Sh. A K Sherawat Counsel for accused with all three accused.One more opportunity is requested for furnishing of bail bond.Be awaited.



Sh. A K Sherawat Counsel for accused with all three accused.Bail bond of accused Harbhajan furnished considered and rejected.Bail bond of accused Saroj furnished considered and rejected.Bail bond of accused Rajkumar not furnished.Counsel seeks further time for furnishing of bail bond and advancing

arguments on charge.On request time is given. Written arguments be also filed for the

NDOH.To come up on 05.05.2016 for arguments on charge/furnishing of bail

bond.



FIR 320/15STATE Vs. SHAMIM KHAN & ORS. Sangam Vihar19.02.2016

Present: Sh. Ritendra Singh, Ld. APP for the State.Sh. M Naushad Counsel for complainant with complainant. Sh. Mohd. Sazzad proxy Counsel for accused with accused Mushtak and

Istayak.

An application for exemption of accused Shamim filed. Application perused and considered. For the reasons stated therein, the application for exemption from

personal appearance of accused Shamim is allowed for today only subject to production of medical certificates on the NDOH, failing which cost of Rs.2000/ shall be imposed on him. Application is accordingly disposed off.

Bail bond verification received. In view of the report bail bond of accused Mushtak and Istayak are accepted.

Passover requested by the accused. Be awaited.



Sh. Mohd. Sazzad proxy Counsel for accused with accused Mushtak and Istayak.

It is submitted that complete set of documents have been received. To come up on 11.03.2016 for argument on charge.



FIR 183/13STATE Vs. MULTAN@IMRAN KHAN & ORSSaket19.02.2016

Present: Sh. Ritendra Singh, Ld. APP for the State.

Ms. Rajkumari Ld. LAC for accused with both the accused.

Report on the summons issued to the complainant through the office of

DCP perused as per which the complainant could not be traced.

Issue summons to the PWs at Sl. No. 3,5 and 6 in the list of witnesses

for the next date of hearing.

To come up on 05.03.2016 for entire PE.

Summons be issued to the witness at Sl. No. 5 through the Medical

Superintendent (MS) concerned along with the copy of the MLC. In case, the doctor

who has prepared the MLC has left the services, MS is directed to provide his

available addresses in the records. Further, if any address of the said doctor is not

available, MS is directed to depute some other doctor who can identify signatures and

hand writing of doctor.



FIR 175/14STATE Vs. JASPAL SINGH & OTHERS Saket19.02.2016


Sh. Manoj Chauhan Counsel for accused with accused Jaspal, Gurdeep.

Accused Gurditt is present with proxy counsel Sh. Ajay Goswami.

Sh. R K Shukla proxy counsel for accused Vijay.

Applications for exemptions of accused Raj Singh, Krishanjeet, Surjeet,

Jasvinder and Vijay Singh filed.

Application perused and considered.

For the reasons stated therein, the application for exemption from

personal appearance of accused Raj Singh, Krishanjeet, Surjeet, Jasvinder and Vijay

Singh are allowed for today only. Application is accordingly disposed off.

Record perused.

Fresh summons be issued to PW Anna and Andrias through the

Ministry of External Affairs/ Ministry of Home Affairs alongwith authenticated

translation of the documents in terms of the previous communications for 15.07.2016.



FIR 351/11STATE Vs. ASHOK YADAV Sangam Vihar19.02.2016


Sh. S Mohiuddin Counsel for accused with all three accused.

PW1 and PW2 are present.

It is stated that the matter has been compromised between the

complainant and the accused and accused seeks one opportunity to approach Hon’ble

High Court for quashing of the present FIR.

Complainant submits that she is willing to cooperate with the accused

for quashing of the present FIR.

In view of the submissions only one opportunity is given.

To come up on 05.05.2016 for receiving of quashing order if any/PE.

PW1 and PW 2 are discharged unexamined for today.

They are bound down for the NDOH.



FIR 1180/15STATE Vs. JARIF AHMAD Ambedkar Nagar19.02.2016

Present: Sh. Ritendra Singh, Ld. APP for the State.Ms. Vandana Sharma ld. LAC for accused with accused produced from

JC.PW2 Ct. Monu and PW3 SI Krishan Pal are present, examined, cross

examined and discharged.On request PE is closed.To come up for recording of SA at 03.00 PM.



Ms. Vandana Sharma ld. LAC for accused with accused produced from JC.

Sh. Ashok Kotnala and Sunil Tiwari Counsel for complainant with complainant.

Fresh V/n filed on behalf of the Complainant. Same is taken on record.Statement of Accused recorded separately U/s. 313 Cr.Pc.To come up for final arguments on 29.02.2016 at 3.00pm.



CC / 392/1 / 14 ARCHI BHARDWAJ (DVA) Vs. MANISH KAUSHIK Malviya Nagar19.02.2016

Present: None for the aggrieved.

Sh. Sunil Devadi Counsel for respondent no.1.

Matter is listed for CE however none has appeared on behalf of

aggrieved for the same.

In the interest of justice last and final opportunity is given to the

aggrieved to lead her evidence failing which her right for CE may be closed.

To come up 09.05.2016 for CE/ appearance of aggrieved.



CC / 172/1 / 14 MANISHA Vs. SUNIL Ambedkar Nagar19.02.2016

Present: Sh. Shamsher Ali Counsel for aggrieved with aggrieved.

Sh. Paradeep Kumar proxy Counsel for respondents with all three

respondents.

Income affidavit was filed by the respondent no.1 on 02.01.2016. Copy

supplied.

List of witnesses alongwith evidence by way of affidavit of CW Sunita,

Vijay and Akbar filed today. Copy supplied.

No evidence by way of affidavit of aggrieved have been filed with

advance copy to the respondents.

To come up on 19.04.2016 for CE.

Earlier date of 20.02.2016 stand canceled.



CC / 299/1 / 14 PRADEEP SETHI (200) Vs. RAJNISH BHAGIRATH Malviya Nagar19.02.2016

Present: Sh. Pramod Sharma Counsel for complainant.

Sh. S K Tandon Counsel for accused with accused.

An application for exemption of complainant filed.



personal appearance of complainant is allowed for today only subject to production of

medical certificate on the NDOH, failing which cost of Rs.2000/ shall be imposed on

him. Application is accordingly disposed off.

Counsel for accused submits he requires atleast 23hrs. to cross

examine the witness.

To come up on 21.04.2016 and 22.04.2016 for CE.



CC / 110/1A / 14 RASHMI SHARMA Vs. DEEPAK SHARMA & ORS. Sangam Vihar19.02.2016

Present: Ms. Vandna Sharma Ld. LAC for aggrieved with aggrieved.

Sh. N K Sharma Counsel for respondent no.2 and 3 with respondent no.

2 and 3.

An application for exemption of respondent no.1 filed.



personal appearance of respondent no.1 is allowed for today only. Application is

accordingly disposed off.

Counsel for aggrieved submits that she will file the relevant documents

with appropriate application within two days and she has already supplied advance

copy of the document to the counsel for the respondents today.

Counsel for respondents seeks adjournment due to some personal

difficulty.

Adjournment not apposed.

To come up for CE on 30.03.2016.



CC / 72/1 / 15 HAJRA MALIK Vs. FAROOQ MALIK Malviya Nagar19.02.2016

Present: Sh. Amit Pawar proxy Counsel for aggrieved with aggrieved.

Sh. C P Singh proxy Counsel for respondents with respondent no.1.

No vakalatnama on behalf of respondent no. 2 and 3 is on record.

Counsel undertakes to file the same on the NDOH alongwith the reply.

Reply filed on behalf of respondent no.1. Copy supplied today.

Income affidavit of aggrieved filed. Copy supplied today.

Last and final opportunity is given to the respondent no. 2 and 3 to file

their reply and to the respondent no.1 to file his income affidavit within two weeks

with advance copy to the aggrieved failing which the defence of the respondents shall

be struck off.

To come up on 22.04.2016 for arguments on interim application.

(Pooja Aggarwal)

MM02 (Mahila Court), South Saket Courts/N.D./19.02.2016

CC / 149/1 / 15 LALITA Vs. AMIT & ORS Ambedkar Nagar19.02.2016Present: Ms. Ritu Shahi Counsel for aggrieved with aggrieved.

Sh. Manoj Kumar Counsel for respondent no.1 with respondent no.1.

Sh. Avnish Mishra Counsel for respondent no.3 and proxy counsel for

respondent no. 2 with respondent no. 2 and 3.

Consolidated reply filed on behalf of all respondents alongwith income

affidavit of respondent no.1. Copy supplied.

It is submitted that the marriage between the parties is not disputed and

it is also not disputed that subsequent to the marriage the parties resided together in

the shared household. Admittedly, no child has been born out of the wedlock.

Aggrieved has alleged that the respondent no.1 is earning Rs. 20,000/

per month from a job. It is also alleged that the aggrieved is living at the mercy of

her parents.

As per income affidavit of the aggrieved Lalita, she has studied till class

10th and is presently not working. No assets have been disclosed and she has claimed

household expenses to be about Rs.5000/ per month, medical expenses to be about

Rs. 2000/ per month and litigation expenses to be about Rs.55,000/ for total

monthly expenditure of Rs. 7000/. Interestingly while in her main application

aggrieved has stated the income of respondent no.1 to be Rs. 20,000/ per month, in

the income affidavit she has reduced the same to Rs. 15,000/ per month. She has not

disclosed any bank account. Also no documents supporting the alleged expenses

claimed have been filed by the aggrieved nor has she filed any document to show the

income of respondent as alleged.

On the other hand as per the income affidavit of the respondent no.1, he

is 12th class pass working in a private job as auto driver earning about Rs. 6,500/ per

month without any persons dependent upon him. He has disclosed litigation

expenses of Rs. 5000/, monthly rent of Rs. 1500/, household expenses of about

3500/ including groceries, gas, telephone and cable/Internet charges. He has

disclosed travel expenses of Rs. 2000/per month and medical expenses of Rs. 100/

per month for total monthly expenditure of Rs. 5600/. He has disclosed one

motorcycle, TV as assets and cash in hand of Rs. 1500/. Even the respondent has not

placed on record any document to show his income or expenditure.

I have carefully considered the submissions made by Ms. Ritu Shahi,

counsel for aggrieved and Sh. Manoj Kumar, counsel for the respondent no.1 and I

have also carefully perused the material on record.

At the stage of deciding an application for grant of interim relief, there

is required to be established prima facie

•that the applicant is an aggrieved person within the meaning of Section 2(a) of the

Act

•that a domestic relationship exists between the aggrieved and the respondent within

the meaning of Section 2(f) of the Act;

•that the aggrieved and the respondent were residing together in the shared

household within the meaning of Section 2(s) of the Act

As the factum of marriage between the parties is not disputed and it is not in dispute

that aggrieved after her marriage was residing with respondents at her matrimonial

house therefore, domestic relationship and residence in the shared household prima

facie stand proved.

To ascertain whether or not the aggrieved has been subjected to

domestic violence so as to bring her within the ambit of Section 4(a) of Protection of

Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 as to enable her for grant of any interim

relief, it is borne in mind that the allegations and counter allegations levelled by

parties cannot be proved at this initial stage as the same is a matter of trial requiring

evidence to be led. Prima facie at this stage on the basis of the pleadings of the

aggrieved as also on the basis of the DIR on record, domestic violence is presumed to

have been inflicted upon the aggrieved by the respondent no.1. Hence, aggrieved is

entitled to claim maintenance from respondent no.1.

In the facts and circumstances of the present case, considering that the

respondent no.1 is able bodied and that it is the prime responsibility of the husband

to maintain his legally wedded wife, his income is presumed to be equivalent to a

‘unskilled worker’ and is assessed to be Rs. 8000/ to Rs. 9000/ per month as per the

notification of GNCT of Delhi. Hence, the respondent no.1 is directed to pay sum of

Rs. 2200/ to the aggrieved from the date of filing of the present application till the

pendency of the trial. Needless to mention that this includes rent towards alternative

accommodation because aggrieved despite having a right to reside in the shared

household is residing separately therefrom.

Aggrieved is directed to provide bank account details to respondent no.

1, if any, so that the interim maintenance can be deposited in the account of aggrieved

directly on or before 15th day of each English calender month. The default shall be

viewed in terms of the judgment of Hon'ble High Court in Gaurav Sondhi Vs. Divya

Sondhi – 120 DLT (2005) 426. Any maintenance that has already been ordered to be

paid shall be accordingly adjusted.

The application Under Section 23 of the DV Act is disposed off

accordingly.

Evidence by way of affidavit of all complainant’s witnesses alongwith

list of witnesses be filed on the NDOH with advance copy to the respondents.

Matter to come up for CE for 04.04.2016 and 05.04.2016.

Copy of order be given dasti to both the parties, after due receiving.



CC / 468/1 / 14 PARWATI Vs. JAI SINGH & ORS Sangam Vihar19.02.2016

Present: Sh. Arun Kumar proxy Counsel for aggrieved with aggrieved.

Sh. R B Bhargav Counsel for respondents with respondent no.1.

Fresh income affidavit of respondent no.1 filed. Copy supplied today.

It is already 01.33 PM.

To come up on 04.04.2016 for arguments on interim application.



CC / 6/1 / 14 SMT SANGEETA CHOPRA Vs. SANDEEP CHOPRA Hauz Khas19.02.2016

Present: Sh. Wajid Ali Counsel for aggrieved with aggrieved.

Sh. Ashutosh Jha Counsel for respondent with respondent.

Matter could not be settled in mediation.

Record perused.

No separate reply has been filed by the respondent to the interim

application who stakes that he wishes to rely on the reply and document filed

alongwith main application.

Adjournment requested by the aggrieved for advancing arguments on

interim application.

Adjournment request not opposed.

On request to come up for arguments on interim application on

04.05.2016.



CC / 294/1 / 14 SUBHA AGGARWAL Vs. SATISH AGGARWAL & ORS.Safdarjung Enclave19.02.2016

Present: Aggrieved in person.

Sh. Suresh Sharma Counsel for respondents.

Copy of income affidavit of respondent no.1 supplied to the aggrieved

today from the court file.

Counsel for aggrieved is stated to be on his way from High Court.

Oral exemption requested on behalf of respondent no. 1 stating that he

is not well.

For the reasons stated, the personal appearance of respondent no.1. is

allowed for today only subject to production of medical certificate on the NDOH,

failing which cost of Rs.2000/ shall be imposed on him.

To come up for arguments on application for dismissal/ interim relief on

11.05.2016.



CC / 257/1 / 14 RASHMI DANG (DVA) Vs. JAYANT DANG Malviya Nagar19.02.2016

Present: Sh. Nishant Kumar Srivastva Ld. LAC for the aggrieved with aggrieved.

Ms. Vandana Sharma counsel for respondent.

The aggrieved is directed to take steps to specify all the documents

relied upon by her.

To come up on 14.03.2016 for further proceedings.



CC / 21/1 / 15 SEEMA Vs. RAM KUMAR Malviya Nagar19.02.2016

Present: Sh. Rahul Jain proxy Counsel for Ms. Deepka Rawat Ld. LAC for aggrieved.Respondent is exparte.Aggrieved submits that she has no objection if Sh. Rahul Jain advances

arguments and she does not wish to apply for a new legal aid counsel.Exparte final arguments heard.To come up for clarification/orders on 29.02.2016.



FIR 175/13STATE Vs. DASHRATH Sangam Vihar19.02.2016


Ms. Kavita Ld. LAC for accused with accused produced from JC.

Final arguments heard. Written arguments has also been filed by the

accused. Taken on record.

To come up for clarifications/order on 22.02.2016.



CC No. 7/1Divya V SachinPS Malviya Nagar19.02.2016File taken up on an application for remove of passport and laptop.

Present: Aggrieved in person.Sh. Jitender Chaudhary Counsel for respondent no.1 with respondent no. 1.Respondent no.1 submits that he does not have laptop or the passport.

He however submits that he has the car Swift LDI which he is willing to hand over to the aggrieved.

One set of the keys and documents handed over by the respondent no.1 to the aggrieved today in court. Since, the respondent no.1 has denied having the laptop and passport, the same becomes the matter of trial and cannot be decided at this stage.

To come up for the purpose fixed on date fixed i.e. on 23.03.2016.Reply, if any be filed by the respondent on the NDOH with advance

copy to the aggrieved.Respondent no. 1 is directed to file his income affidavit with advance

copy to the aggrieved in terms of judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Kusum Sharma Vs. Mahender Kumar Sharma dated 14.01.2015 along with all the relevant documents on the NDOH with advance copy to the respondent.



FIR 739/15State V Pankaj PS Sangam Vihar19.02.2016


Sh. Shamsher Ali advocate (enrollment no.D/1146/98) on behalf of

complainant with complainant.

Memo of appearance on behalf of complainant be filed during the

course of the day. V/n be filed within two days.

Status report has been received from ASI Dharmveer Singh duly

forwarded by SHO. Report perused.

Copy of status report supplied to the complainant.

In view of the report, the present application stands disposed off.



FIR 371/14State V Shiv Kumar PS Ambedkar Nagar 19.02.2016


Ms. Anita Sharma proxy counsel for complainant.

No status report has been received and it is stated that steps were not

taken by the complainant for the same.

Requisite steps be taken today itself.

SHO to report for 24.02.2016 at 02.00 PM.



CC No. 42/1Shabnam V ShaqeelPS Ambedkar Nagar19.02.2016Fresh application u/s. 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act received by way of assignment from the Court of Ld. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (South), Saket Courts, New Delhi. It be checked and registered as per rules.Present: Sh. Ravi Shankar and Mohd. Musabbir Ansari Counsel for aggrieved

with aggrieved.Record perused.

Income affidavit of aggrieved filed. Taken on record Allegations of domestic violence have been made against respondent

no.13. Prima facie there is sufficient material to indicate existence of domestic relationship and shared household of the aggrieved with the respondent no13.

However, no shared household can be said to be in existence of the aggrieved with respondent no. 49 as in the pleading and also in the court today the aggrieved has stated that only respondent no. 1,2 and 3 resided in the shared household and the other respondents used to visit frequently as they resided in the neighborhood and hence the summoning of respondent no. 49 is declined.

Accordingly, issue notice of the applications to the respondent no.13 on filing of PF /RC/speed post returnable on 29.03.2016.

Notice be issued to the Protection Officer on filing of PF for filing of DIR.



CC No. 43/1Nisha V VijayPS Sangam Vihar 19.02.2016Fresh application u/s. 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act received by way of assignment from the Court of Ld. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (South), Saket Courts, New Delhi. It be checked and registered as per rules.Present: Sh. Ayub Khan Counsel for aggrieved with aggrieved.

Income affidavit is on record.

Heard. Record perused.

Allegations of domestic violence have been made against respondent

no.14. Prima facie there is sufficient material to indicate existence of domestic

relationship and shared household of the aggrieved with the respondent no.14.

Accordingly, issue notice of the applications to the respondent no.14 on

filing of PF /RC/speed post returnable on 26.02.2016.

Notice be issued to the Protection Officer on filing of PF for filing of

DIR.



CC No. 44/1Neha V YadvinderPS Malviya Nagar19.02.2016Fresh application u/s. 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act received by way of assignment from the Court of Ld. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (South), Saket Courts, New Delhi. It be checked and registered as per rules.Present: Sh. M L Chaudhary Counsel for aggrieved with aggrieved.

Income affidavit is on record.

Heard. Record perused.

Allegations of domestic violence have been made against respondent

no.13. Prima facie there is sufficient material to indicate existence of domestic


Accordingly, issue notice of the applications to the respondent no.13 on

filing of PF /RC/speed post returnable on 22.03.2016.

Notice be issued to the Protection Officer on filing of PF for filing of

DIR.



CC No.40/1Tabasum V Mohd. RizwanPS Sangam Vihar19.02.2016

Present: Sh. Mahinder Pratap counsel for the aggrieved with aggrieved.

Ms. Preeti Mudgal, Protection Officer is present.

DIR has been filed. Taken on record.

Income affidavit filed by the aggrieved. Taken on record.

Allegations of domestic violence have been made against respondent no.

1. Prima facie there is sufficient material to indicate existence of domestic


However, the existence of shared household qua respondent no. 2 and 3

is not clear. Aggrieved is directed to advance submissions on the same on the NDOH.

Accordingly, issue notice of the applications under D.V. Act to the

respondents no.1 on filing of of PF /RC/speed post returnable on 09.03.2016.



FIR No.42/10State V Imtiaz PS Hauz Khas19.02.2016


Accused is present.

On a court query the accused has not been able to satisfy the court that

he understands the contents of the application for plea bargaining as filed by him or

he understands the nature or extent of punishment provided. In these circumstances

the application for plea bargaining is dismissed.

File be sent back to the court of Ld. CMM (South) today itself for

further orders.

Ahlmed is directed to sent the file immediately complete in all

respects.

Accused is directed to appear today itself before the Ld. CMM, South at

03.00 PM for further orders.



19.02.2016

Present:



FIR 2144/15State V Mohd. AsifPS Malviya Nagar19.02.2016

File taken on an application for grant of bail.


Sh. A A Madni Counsel for accused.

An application for grant of bail was filed on 18.02.2016.

Counsel for accused submits that he does not wish to press the

application at this stage and wishes to withdraw the same.

In view of submissions the present application is permitted to be

withdrawn.

Application is disposed off as withdrawn.



FIR 775/05STATE Vs. SUBE SINGH Malviya Nagar19.02.2016


Sh. Jitender Verma, advocate ( enrollment no. D897/2006 ) on behalf of

complainant.

Accused Adesh is present. Memo of appearance on behalf of

complainant be filed during the course of the day. V/n be filed on the NDOH.

Sh. Jitneder Verma has placed on record a computer generated copy of

order dated 23.11.2015 passed by Hon’ble Delhi High Court wherein interim order

has been directed to be continued. However the counsel has not appraised the court as

to which interim order has been continued. He is directed to place on record certified

copies of the orders of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court.

It is stated that the matter is listed before the Hon Delhi High Court on

22.04.2016. In view of the same to come up for 05.05.2016 for PE/ further

proceedings.



CC / 189/1 / 15 SUMAN LATA & ANR. Vs. DAVINDER KUMAR Hauz Khas19.02.2016

Present: None.

From material on record it is not clear as to whether on date of filing of

the present case the aggrieved was residing within the territorial jurisdiction of this

court. Aggrieved is directed to be present in person for the NDOH.

To come up on 05.03.2016 for appearance of aggrieved/clarifications.



FIR No. 137/16PS Safdarjung EnclaveState V Rahasaya Bihari19.02.2016


Sh. S K Sharma Counsel for accused with surety.

Bail bond verification report received.

Report perused.

The submissions of the surety have been heard.

The bail bonds as furnished are rejected.



ex / 56 / 14 archi bhardwaj vs. manish kaushik malviya...

Documents