COMPLAINT AGAINST THE BELOW-MENTIONED Accused persons FOR THE CRIMINAL OFFENCE OF CRIMINAL BREACH OF TRUST U/S 405 CRIMINAL BREACH OF TRUST, U/S 406 PUNISHMENT FOR CRIMINAL BREACH OF TRUST, U/S 120A CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY, U/S 120B PUNISHMENT FOR CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY, U/S 503 CRIMANL INTIMIDATION, U/S 506 PUNISHMENT FOR CRIMINAL INTIMIDATION, U/S 441 CRIMINAL TRESSPASS , U/S 447 PUNISHMENT FOR CRIMINAL TRESSPASS, U/S 509 WORD, GESTURE OR ACT INTENDED TO INSULT THE MODESTY OF A WOMAN under INDIAN PENAL CODE
REGD. AD/SPEED POST
Red: LAC-07022023-1420 Dated: 07.02.2023
TO,
D.C.P
Through S.H.O,
Dwarka South Police Station
Near ITL Public School,
Dwarka Sector-9, Dwarka
New Delhi,
Delhi - 110077
SUBJECT: COMPLAINT AGAINST THE BELOW-MENTIONED Accused persons FOR THE CRIMINAL OFFENCE OF CRIMINAL BREACH OF TRUST U/S 405 CRIMINAL BREACH OF TRUST, U/S 406 PUNISHMENT FOR CRIMINAL BREACH OF TRUST, U/S 120A CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY, U/S 120B PUNISHMENT FOR CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY, U/S 503 CRIMANL INTIMIDATION, U/S 506 PUNISHMENT FOR
CRIMINAL INTIMIDATION, U/S 441 CRIMINAL TRESSPASS , U/S 447 PUNISHMENT FOR CRIMINAL TRESSPASS, U/S 509 WORD, GESTURE OR ACT INTENDED TO INSULT THE MODESTY OF A WOMAN under INDIAN PENAL CODE
COMPLAINANTS:
VIMLA BHATIA (Senior Citizen)
Aged - 80 years
R/O E-102, RAMAN VIHAR CGHS,
PLOT NO. 5A, DWARKA,
DELHI-110075 …COMPLAINANT NO. 1
MUKTA BHATIA
C-3/272, JANAK PURI,
NEW DELHI-110058 …COMPLAINANT NO.2
Accused persons:
SANJAY DALAL
S/o SH. J.S DALAL
R/o 32/27, EAST PATEL NAGAR,
NEW DELHI- 110088 …ACCUSED NO. 1
DHRUV KUMAR VATS
S/O MR. ASHOK KUMAR VATS
R/O VILLA NO. 4454 ACHIEVERS
NEAR SAINT COLONY,
SECTOR- 49, FARIDABAD,
HARYANA- 121001 …ACCUSED NO. 2
Respected Sir/Ma’am,
Under the instructions and on behalf of my clients(hereinafter known as Complainants); I do hereby serve upon you this complaint against the above mentioned Accused persons:
That, the Complainants are a respectful and law-abiding citizen, without any criminal antecedent and are currently residing at the above-mentioned address.
That, both the Complainants are widows and that the Complainant No. 1 is a senior citizen.
That, the Complainants are the co-owners of the Subject Property bearing no. C-16, Sector-8, Dwarka, New Delhi - 45, through a registered sale deed Document No. 10565, in Addl. Book-1, Volume No. 9758 on pages 81-87, Dated: 08/11/2018, registered in the office of SR-IX, New Delhi.
That the Complainants entered into a Lease Deed dated 15.09.2021 with Mr Sunil Kumar(hereinafter known as Lessee), solely for the purpose of operating a 'Paying Guest House-For Commercial Purposes' on the aforementioned Subject Property.
The Complainant entered into a Lease Agreement with Sunil Kumar (hereinafter Lessee) who is Accused person’s friend. The property was leased for operating a Paying Guest House at C-16, Sector-8, Dwarka, New Delhi - 45 to Sunil Kumar and not the Accused in this case.
The Accused persons are friends of the Lessee, who would regularly visit the property along with his anti-social associates and the Lessee, and upon inquiry, claimed to be one of the friends of Sunil Kumar - Lessee, and upon questioning the lessee , who said that Accused persons are his friend and he is visiting the premises casually as a friend. It is pertinent to note that without the will, consent and approval of the Complainants, the Accused persons along with their anti-social goons started running a Hotel business under the franchisee of OYO.
The said illicit activities came to the knowledge of the Complainant vide RWA letter dated 11.10.2021 that an illegal Hotel business was being run at the leased property. Upon inquiring about the same from the Lessee, the Lessee told the Complainants that he was unaware of the same and assured the Complainant that she had been receiving wrong information. However, later it came to the knowledge of the Complainant that the Accused persons and their anti-social associates were not only running the business of the hotel but were also running the business of prostitution, rave parties etc. on the Complainant’s property.
The Complainant questioned the Accused persons regarding their purpose of a daily visit to the Property to which the Accused persons along with their anti-social associates used disrespectful and filthy language and actions towards the Complainants. The Accused persons told the Complainants that the Complainants have no right to question them as the Accused persons are not in any agreement with the Complainants and as the Accused persons are friends with the Lessee so the Complainants should rather talk to the Lessee and not the Accused persons. The Accused and his anti-social associate threatened the Complainants of dire consequences if the Complainants ever again tried to interfere in their business.
That on 11.10.2021 the Complainant filed a complaint against the Accused persons and his antisocial associates at P.S Sector 9 Dwarka.
After the above-mentioned incident, the Complainants started to get into trouble with the anti-social goons of the Accused persons, in the form of filthy, inhuman and sexist comments or through calls and regular visits at the premises , from unknown numbers regarding the same.
After the intervention of RWA, the Accused persons told the complainant that the property has been sublet to him, and the lessee has given the property to the Accused persons, by subletting him to run the business.
That it is pertinent to mention here that there was no agreement, willingness, or consent from the Complainant’s side to sublet the property to the Accused Persons, and the lessee had neither taken any prior permission before subletting the property, nor informed the Complainants before subletting the property, and the most important point to be considered here is that as per the clause mentioned in the lease agreement, it is specifically mentioned in the agreement that the Lessee is not allowed to sublet the property to anyone, or any third party.
The illegal and unauthorised usage of the said property by the Accused persons, without the will and consent of the legal owner of the property, makes him liable for an offence of criminal trespass, house trespass at the said property which is exclusively owned by the complainant.
That when the Complainant tried to restrain the Accused persons from entering the Property premises, he turned deaf ears to it and even tried to threaten the Complainants with adverse consequences. It is pertinent to mention here that whenever the complainants demanded the eviction and restrainment of the Accused persons in the property, the Accused person threatened the Complainants with their life and dire consequences, spoke unethically to them and used very filthy words against the complainants which insulted their modesty.
That, the Accused person's deception has resulted in incalculable losses of resources, time, and emotional misery for the Complainant.
That, Complainants No. 1 and 2 are women, and it is important to note that Complainant No. 1 is elderly, and suffering from mental torment on a regular basis beacuse of the Accused persons, which can be harmful to her health.
The Complainants, apprehending the safety of their property, called the Police to get rid of the Accused persons and their anti-social goons. The Police officials came to the property site and upon enquiring about the matter from the neighbours found that the Accused persons were creating unethical environment by doing illegal works. The police ordered the Acuused persons to vacate the Property at that very moment.
The Accused on being thrown out of the property, started to harass the Complainants. It was impossible for the Complainants to even come outside of the Property or go anywhere for their personal purposes. The Accused persons along with their anti-social goons would stop them mid-way and harass them.
That, the Complainants are constrained to redress his grievances through this Compliant to seek legal remedy.
That, the Cause of Action arose at the property bearing no. C-16, Sector-8, Dwarka, New Delhi - 45 where the The 'Hotel Business' was being operated, and all the Accused persons were involved in it through a partnership arrangement, hence the Jurisdiction lies within the legal boundaries of Dwarka South Police Station.
That, The Supreme Court in its decision in Satvinder Kaur v. State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) (1999) 8 SCC 728, held that “Section 178 CrPC, inter alia, provides for a place of enquiry or trial when it is uncertain in which of several local areas an offence was committed or where the offence was committed partly in one local area and partly in another and where it consisted of several acts done in different local areas, it could be enquired into or tried by a court having jurisdiction over any of such local areas. Hence, at the stage of the investigation, it cannot be held that the police does not have territorial jurisdiction to investigate the crime.”
That, under these circumstances, I request you to file an FIR and also provide protection according to the directions given by the Apex court in the landmark judgement of Lalita Kumari v/s Govt. of U.P. where it was laid down that the registration of FIR is mandatory under Section 154 of the Code if the information discloses commission of a cognizable offence and that the police officer cannot avoid his duty of registering FIR if the cognizable offence is disclosed.
I, therefore, serve upon you this complaint and request you to register a complaint/FIR, under the above-mentioned sections and provisions of law against the above-mentioned Accused persons people and investigate the matter, collect the evidence and further provide me with the status report or ATR as soon as possible.
A copy is retained for record and for further Legal Action that may arise.
DR. ANUPAM KUMAR MISHRA
ADVOCATE
Comments
Post a Comment