New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Tuesday imposed a cost of Rs 5 lakh on a petitioner who had allegedly demanded money to withdraw an illegal construction case filed against his neighbour.
Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri asked the petitioner to deposit the amount with the Delhi State Legal Services Authority within a period of four weeks. The order also states that the amount should be used for “counsellation/psychological assistance provided to POCSO (Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses Act) victims who are in need of such assistance”.
The court was hearing a petition filed by one Pradeep Agarwal in November 2021, seeking a direction to the Delhi government, the Divisional Commissioner, MCD and the Special Commissioner of Delhi Police to initiate action against his neighbor Ram Niwas Gupta , in which illegal and unauthorized construction was alleged. by him on a parcel of agricultural land in Burari village of Delhi without any permission.
However, during the hearing, Gupta produced tapes of conversations between Aggarwal and a mutual friend, Vijay Kumar Gupta, alleging that Aggarwal was demanding Rs 50 lakh from his neighbor to withdraw the case.
On the direction of the court, the DCP (Crime) probed the conversations and registered an FIR against Agarwal on charges of extortion last year.
the court too directed The criminal contempt case was to be filed against Agarwal in December 2022. was in contempt filed in January this year, and is pending before the court. a division bench of the high court notice issued Aggarwal in contempt case on January 9
This order of Justice Ohri’s bench came three days after the Supreme Court imposed The Uttar Pradesh government has been fined Rs 50,000 for filing a frivolous appeal in a case relating to payment of gratuity to a woman whose lecturer husband died in service in 2009.
Read also: What HC battle between big publishers and ‘rogue’ websites could mean for free access to research
FIR lodged for extortion
Whereas issuing notice On the petition on December 15, the High Court had directed the Delhi government and the station house officer (SHO) concerned to “ensure that no unauthorized construction activity is permitted in the subject area, except as per the approved plan of the government”. as per the plotted development or sanctioned building plan, if any”.
In July 2022, Gupta alleged that Agarwal was trying to extort money from him. He told the court that Aggarwal and Gupta were not just neighbors but knew each other for the last two decades. He also said that several transactions had taken place between them and both had filed several civil and criminal cases against each other.
Gupta also produced a transcript of a conversation between April and May 2022 between Aggarwal and their mutual friend Vijay Kumar Gupta. In August last year then the High Court directed Based on the conversation presented to DCP (Crime) to investigate the matter.
Court was on December 7 last year informed An FIR was registered against Agarwal under section 384 (extortion) of the Indian Penal Code (ipc)by Crime Branch of Delhi Police.
in one Order passed on December 19, the Delhi government also told the court that during the investigation voice samples of Aggarwal and Vijay Kumar Gupta were taken and sent for forensic examination, The status report submitted by the government also revealed that Vijay Kumar Gupta had 12.5 per cent share in the land under consideration before the Delhi HC.
Taking into account the transcript as well as other material produced before it, the court was of “prima facie view that the conduct of the petitioner amounts to an attempt to interfere and obstruct judicial proceedings and administration of justice, which amounts to criminal contempt as defined”. Under Section 2(c) (ii) and (iii) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971”.
The court, therefore, directed the matter to be placed before the Chief Justice of the High Court, so that a criminal contempt case could be initiated against Agarwal.
(Editing by Amritansh Arora)
Read also: Modi government approves appointment of five new SC judges, total strength now 32