Delhi Court Dismisses Government Department’s Appeal for FIR Registration
Sessions court says documentary evidence is sufficient and no police investigation is required in the alleged fraud case
New Delhi, Aug. 1: A Delhi sessions court has dismissed a revision petition filed by the Delhi Government’s Directorate of Employment, refusing its request to direct the registration of an FIR against a private company and its authorised signatory over an alleged financial irregularity involving nearly ₹1.94 lakh.
Additional Sessions Judge Dhirendra Rana upheld an earlier order passed by a magistrate in August 2023, concluding that the material available on record did not warrant a police investigation as the complainant already possessed all relevant evidence.
The dispute stems from a 2012 government tender for the disposal of unserviceable items. According to the Directorate of Employment, the selected company collected the goods and issued two demand drafts worth approximately ₹1.94 lakh. However, the department claimed the payment was never realised because the drafts were submitted to the bank after their validity period had expired.
The complaint further alleged that the company subsequently requested the bank to cancel the demand drafts, resulting in a financial loss to the government. On the other hand, the company maintained that payment was withheld because the goods supplied under the tender were allegedly not of the agreed standard.
In its order dated July 14, the court observed that every document related to the tender process, transfer of goods, demand drafts, and official correspondence was already in the department’s possession. Since the identity of the accused persons was also known, there was no requirement for police assistance to establish the facts of the case.
The court noted that the available documentary evidence could be presented during pre-summoning proceedings and that no recovery of material evidence was necessary, making an FIR-based investigation unnecessary.
Finding no legal error or procedural irregularity in the magistrate’s earlier decision, the sessions court dismissed the revision petition, allowing the previous order to stand. The ruling reinforces the principle that criminal investigation is not automatically required when documentary evidence is already available and can be examined through judicial proceedings.
