The Rohini District Court recently disposed of a revision petition and directed the Delhi Police to register an FIR against Parshwanath Developers. This instruction was given by the developers in a case related to a delay of 17 years allegedly in building a shop in a mall in Rohini Sector 10 despite receiving payment of Rs 33.5 lakh from the complainant.
Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Dhirendra Rana accepted the revision petition and quashed the order passed by the magistrate who refused to direct the FIR.
Permission to revision, Additional Judge Dhirendra Rana said, “In the current case, the court is of the view that the accused persons were intended for dishonesty from the beginning and they had no intention of handing over the related property to the complainant.”
The court said that it is also in record that the accused persons tried to delay the proceedings before the court under the guise of settlement of the case with the complainant. Is not needed.”
Judge Rana said that in the view of this court, using discretion in favor of the complainant, it is a fair case to file an FIR under the relevant sections of the law and to start an investigation without any delay.
ASJ Rana ordered on 24 May, “Therefore, the order of 02.01.2024 is canceled and SHO PS Prashant Vihar is directed to register an FIR against the accused persons under the relevant section of the law as per the content of the law.”
He has directed the police to file a copy of the compliance report and an FIR before the Magistrate Court within two weeks from today. He paid Rs 33.50 lakh. Despite much delay, the shop was not constructed. They filed a complaint against the developers and their directors. However, the magistrate court refused to register an FIR.
In 2024, he moved to the Sessions Court challenging the order of the magistrate court. In January 2007, the accused advertised their upcoming project, Parshwanath Mall Twin District Center, Sector-10, Rohini, Delhi.
When the accused got a full original price of Rs 33,50,904, they started postponing the complainant’s phone call. The judgment said that the complainant also visited the site to see the progress of the construction and found that the said project was completely stopped.
The complainant lodged a complaint in this regard to SHO PS Prashant Vihar on 29.03.2023 and sent it to DCP Rohini. Since the police did not take any action against the accused, the complainant Section 156 (3) CR. Application filed for filing FIR under PC.
