ROMESH SHARMA vs THE STATE

Judgment text excerpt

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Reserved on: 25th August, 2025 Pronounced on: 29th January, 2026 + CRL.REV.P. 646/2004 ROMESH SHARMA S/o Sh. Satya Narayan R/o C-30, May Fair Garden New Delhi .....Petitioner Through: Mr. SP Kaushal, Mr. Dhananjai Kaushal, Mr. Saksham Kalra and Mr. Aaryan Sharma, Advocates versus THE STATE R/o F-16/4, DLF Phase-1 Gurgaon, Haryana .....Respondents Through: Mr. Utkarsh, APP for the State with Insp. Bharat Lal PS Hauz Khas CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA J U D G M E N T 1. Criminal Revision Petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “Cr.P.C.”) has been filed on behalf of Petitioner, Romesh Sharma to challenge the Order on Charge dated 10.08.2004 of the learned ASJ in Sessions Case No. 93/2001 in FIR No. 0849/1998, P.S. Hauz Khas. 2. The learned ASJ had framed the Charges under Section 120B with Section 302 IPC on 10.08.2004. This Order is challenged on the ground Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ANIL CRL.REV.P. 646/2004 Page 1 of 31 KUMAR BHATT Signing Date:29.01.2026 16:59:45 that from the totality of the facts available and the Charge Sheet, there is no material to even prima facie make out the case against the Petitioner, to warrant a trial. It has not been considered that there is no incriminating evidence against the Petitioner in the Chargesheet, to connect him with the alleged offences. 3. The first ground of challenge is that FIR was registered on the basis of Rukka/Complaint dated 03.11.1998 of Insp. Ishwar Singh. He, however, could not have been the Investigating Officer, who collected the evidence and filed the Chargesheet. The entire evidence conducted, is vitiated and the Petitioner is entitled to discharge. 4. Supreme