IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
13.08.2007
Present: Mr. Vinay Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.
None for the respondent.
Crl. M. No.9052/2007 and W.P. (Crl.)1045/2007
<!–[if !supportEmptyParas]–><!–[endif]–>This petition has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer that the conversation recorded by the petitioner between father of the petitioner and the father of the respondent should be heard by the CAW Cell and should be made part of the investigation. I consider that CAW Cell has no power to investigate the crime. It is not a police station where FIRs are registered. Investigation in any crime can be done only after registration of FIR. CAW Cell only makes reconciliatory efforts between the parties that also up to the stage of pre- registration of FIR. The investigation can also be done by CAW Cell if it is referred to it after registration of FIR. Since no FIR has been registered in this case, no directions can be given to CAW Cell for investigation. The petition is infructuous and is hereby dismissed.
SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA, J.
August 13, 2007
______________________________
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
10.08.2007
Present: Mr. Keshav Kaushik, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Mukta Gupta, Standing Counsel for State with
Ms. Rajdipa Behura and Mr. Akshai Malik, Adocates
W.P. (Crl.) No.1032/2007 and Crl.M.A.No. 8989/07
It is stated by the counsel for petitioner that CAW Cell was threatening the petitioner for appearance. It is made clear that CAW Cell has no authority to secure the presence of any person either by coercion or by threat. CAW Cell is only a conciliatory body where efforts are made for conciliation with the free will of the parties. If any person is not willing to go to CAW Cell, he cannot be compelled. It is also directed that CAW Cell, in future, instead of issuing summons to the parties shall send request letters asking them to appear for the purpose of conciliation and not for the purpose of investigation. The petitioner is at liberty not to appear before CAW Cell. No threat or coercive steps shall be taken by the CAW Cell. No further direction can be given by the Court in respect of respondent No. 5, who according to the petitioner has refused to accompany him. It is alleged that she was living under the influence of her parents. Earlier when she appeared in this Court, she was living with the petitioner. She refused to meet her parents at that time. If the respondent is such an immature lady that when she comes under the influence of petitioner, she refuses to meet her parents and next time when she comes under the influence of her parents, she refuses to meet the petitioner, the Court cannot help the petitioner. The petition is disposed of in above terms.
SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA, J.
August 10, 2007
