Crl.MC 1982/2010 Page 1 Of 2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Reserve: 15th December, 2010 Date of Order: January 04, 2011 + Crl. MC No. 1982/2010 % 04.01.2011 Praveen Gupta ...Petitioner Versus State NCT of Delhi & Anr. ...Respondents Counsels: Mr. S.N. Pandey for petitioners. Mr. O.P. Saxena, APP for State/respondent. JUSTICE SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the reporter or not? 3. Whether judgment should be reported in Digest? JUDGMENT 1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 482 Cr.P.C for quashing an FIR No.600 of 2009 lodged with police station Maurya Enclave New Delhi under Section 8/24 of DPT Act, 1994 on the ground that the petitioner has been wrongly impleaded in this FIR for cutting/ removing the trees. It is submitted that the allegations against the petitioner were in the nature of hearsay and the source of the allegations were not known and the FIR was result of conspiracy between respondent no.3 and his friend. 2. It is settled law that powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C should be exercised by this Court sparingly and in those rare cases where no issue of facts was involved. Quashing of FIR on the basis of allegations that the FIR was a false FIR and was result of conspiracy between respondent needs investigation of facts and adjudication of Crl.MC 1982/2010 Page 2 Of 2 allegations made by the petitioner. A cut tree is a sufficient basis for registration of an FIR. I consider that this Court cannot entertain this petition. Let police investigate the case and file a report. The petitioner’s right to address the trial court shall arise only after filing of charge sheet. It is not a case in which the petitioner is sought to be arrested by police. I find no reason to entertain this petition. The petition is hereby dismissed with no orders to costs. January 04, 2011 SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA, J rd