Court orders FIR against Kejriwal to investigate defacement of public property allegations

New Delhi [India], March 11 (ANI): The Rouse Avenue court on Tuesday directed Delhi police to register an FIR against Arvind Kejriwal and others in a matter related to the defacement of public property in the Dwarka area in 2019.
This direction has been passed on a complaint filed by Shiv Kumar Saksena.
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (ACJM) Neha Mittal allowed the complaint and directed the Delhi police to file a compliance report on March 18.
The court said that the court is of the considered opinion that the application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. deserves to be allowed.
"Accordingly, the concerned SHO is directed to register FIR immediately U/s 3 of Delhi Prevention of Defacement of Property Act, 2007 and any other offence that appears to have been committed from the facts of the case," ACJM Mittal order on March 11.
It was stated by the complainant that the accused persons are misusing public money by putting
huge size hoardings at Sector -11 DDA Park, Dwarka road and crossing, Delhi Development Authority MP green area at Sector -11, Dwarka (behind DDA Sports Complex), Sector-10 main crossing and Sector -10/11, Sector -6/10 main decorated crossing and roads, power poles, DDA park boundary wall and other public places.
It was further stated that in one of the hoardings, it is stated that the Delhi Government will soon start registration for darshan at Kartarpur Sahib and the same bears the photographs and names of Arvind Kejriwal, the then CM, and Gulab Singh, then MLA, Matiyala Constituency. In another hoarding, greetings of Gurunanak Dev Jayanti and Kartik Purnima have been extended to the local residents and the same bears the photograph and name of Nitika Sharma, Nigam Parshad and photographs of PM Narender Modi, Amit Shah, Manoj Tiwari, J.P. Nadda,
Parvesh Verma, Ramesh Bidhuri and others.
A complaint was given to the police also but not Action was taken.
A status report was filed in the year 2022 on behalf of SHO, of Dwarka South police station stating that the present complaint was filed in 2019 and at present (i.e. at the time of filing status report) no such hoardings have been found displayed at the alleged spot and hence, no cognizable offence is made out at present.
In view of the status report Metropolitan Magistrate of Dwarka court had dismisses the complaint on September 15, 2022.
The complainant had filed a revision petition before the Rouse Avenue court. Petition was allowed and matter was revert back for fresh hearing.
The session court had directed to decide the application under Section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C. afresh with a speaking order on the disclosure of a cognizable offence from the allegations made by the complainant. It is further directed that the Trial Court shall then decide the question of directions under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. or proceeding with the complaint in the manner of a complaint case.
Legal Aid Counsel (LAC) for complainant argued that even in the status report, the Enquiry Officer had merely submitted that no hoarding was found on the date of filing of status report and that the report is silent regarding the existence of hoardings on the date and time as alleged by the complainant.
It was further argued that investigation is required to be carried out in the present case as it is beyond the means of the complainant to determine who affixed the hoardings in question.
Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) for the State opposed the plea and argued that it can be seen from the photographs annexed with the complaint that the details of printing press are not mentioned on the hoardings and hence, it is impossible to determine from where the said hoardings were printed and at whose instance.
It was submitted that in such circumstances, no purpose would be served by allowing the present application. It is further argued that complainant had mentioned the.names of approximately 8-10 persons as accused including the name of Prime Minister of India in the complaints filed by him in the concerned PS and before DCP but most of these names have been omitted from the present application and thus, the present application cannot be said to have been filed after due compliance of Section 154(3) Cr.P.C. With these submissions, it is prayed that there is no need to order registration of FIR in the present case.
The court rejected the contention APP with respect to the omission of names of certain persons from the present complaint and said that it cannot have, in the opinion of this court, any bearing on the fate of the present application.
The Court said, " The mentioning or omitting the name of certain persons by the complainant cannot determine the course of investigation. The investigating agency has ample power to array any person as accused, though not named as an accused in the present application/complaint, whose complicity in the commission of offence is established from the investigation." (ANI)