Complaint motivated: Puri | india | Hindustan Times
  • Monday, Jun 18, 2018
  •   °C  
Today in New Delhi, India
Jun 18, 2018-Monday
-°C
New Delhi
  • Humidity
    -
  • Wind
    -

Complaint motivated: Puri

FORMER DGP Swaraj Puri on Friday claimed before the special judge that the complainant has been sponsored. After hearing the arguments of counsel representing Puri, Economic Offence Wing (EOW) and complainant Mahesh Garg, Special judge Akhilesh Pandya reserved the judgement till October 6 for order on the fact fudging case filed against the former DGP.

india Updated: Sep 30, 2006 15:25 IST

FORMER DGP Swaraj Puri on Friday claimed before the special judge that the complainant has been sponsored. After hearing the arguments of counsel representing Puri, Economic Offence Wing (EOW) and complainant Mahesh Garg, Special judge Akhilesh Pandya reserved the judgement till October 6 for order on the fact fudging case filed against the former DGP.

The hearing came up after the ex-DGP on Wednesday had charged the EOW with filing false and misleading information and had appealed to scrap the FIR registered against him.

Puri made the claim about Garg through his counsel Ajay Gupta. The EOW, on the other hand, maintained that it registered the FIR as it could not have begun investigations without it under the Section 154 of Cr PC and moreover, it was the Special Judge who ordered to register a criminal case against the accused.

The counsel for Puri insisted that September 15 order could not be seen in isolation as the Judge had ordered inquiry for limited purpose to help him ascertain whether the allegations levelled against the police official were true and on the basis of which he could decide whether complaint merited attention or whether it should be dropped. So there is no question of registering FIR against Puri, Gupta argued.

He added that the court in its order had also said it was not satisfied with material produced before it to support the case. During the course of arguments, the counsel quoted the Section 202 of Cr PC mentioned in the order, which debars issuance of summons to the accused unless the court is satisfied with documents produced before it in support of the allegations.

The senior police official had moved the district court stating that the FIR lodged against him was “vexatious, malafide” and handiwork of “vested interests” who wanted him to be removed as DGP. He had also demanded that the EOW officials in charge of the investigation be booked for contempt for submitting false and misleading information to the court.

Garg had filed a private complaint through counsel Dr Manohar Dalal that Puri’s son Shreyas was admitted to Govindram Saxeria Institute of Technology and Science (SGSITS), Indore, under the NRI quota on forged documents.