-
by Admin
07 May 2024 2:49 AM
In a recent judgment, the Delhi High Court, presided by Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, upheld the framing of charges against the petitioner in an assault case. The case involved allegations of abuse, misbehavior, and physical assault by the accused against a lawyer in the court premises.
The petitioner, identified as Dhanpati alias Dhanwanti, had filed a petition seeking the setting aside of the charges framed against them under Sections 341, 323, and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The petitioner argued that they had been falsely implicated and that there was insufficient evidence to support the complainant's claims.
After hearing arguments from both sides, the court held that at the stage of framing charges, the court's role is limited to determining whether a prima facie case has been made out against the accused. The court emphasized that a detailed inquiry into the evidence or weighing its sufficiency cannot be conducted at this stage. The court also dismissed the petitioner's contention that the complainant, being a lawyer representing the accused's previous adversary, had filed a false case out of personal bias.
ustice Sharma further noted that lawyers have a professional duty to provide representation to their clients while maintaining fairness and respect for the legal process. Personal enmity or grudges cannot be presumed solely based on the representation of clients. The court emphasized the importance of assessing each complaint independently, irrespective of the financial or professional status of the parties involved.
The court highlighted that the powers of the court to interfere at the stage of framing charges are limited, and such interference should only be exercised in exceptional cases and on rare occasions. In this case, the court found no grounds to interfere with the charges framed against the petitioner.
Date of Decision: 29th May 2023
Dhanpati @ Dhanwanti vs The State (Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi) & Anr.
[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/29-May-23-Dhanpati-Vs-State-DHC.pdf"]
