REPORTED * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % DATE OF DECISION: April 01, 2009 + CRL.M.C. 2042/2007 and Crl. M.A. 7259/2007 DR. DINESH GUTPA & ORS. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. B.P. Aggarwal, Advocate versus D.D.A. ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Rajdipa Behura and Mr. Deepak Anand, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REVA KHETRAPAL 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? : REVA KHETRAPAL, J. (Oral) 1. By way of this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioners No.1 and 2, who are Doctors by profession and are running a Medical Centre by the name of Roopali Medical Centre in premises bearing No.C-4/77A, Yamuna Vihar, Delhi seek quashing of the complaint case dated 7th March, 1995 registered at the instance of the respondent–Delhi Development Authority pending in the Court of Shri A.K. Chaturvedi, learned Metropolitan Magistrate bearing CC No.71/95 titled “Delhi Development Authority vs. Roopali Medical Centre”. CRL.M.C. 2042/2007 Page No. 1 of 3 2. It is not in dispute that the respondent has filed the complaint as the property is residential and the petitioners are using portion of the same for running a nursing home under the name and style of the petitioner No.3 and, according to the respondent, the running of the nursing home is violative of Section 14 read with Section 29(2) of the Delhi Development Act, 1957 as amounting to misuser by the petitioners. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in view of the settled legal position as enunciated by a Division Bench of this Court in DMA Nursing Home & Medical Establishment Forum vs. Union of India & Others reported in 93 (2001) DLT 279, it is open to the petitioners to run the nursing home where it is being presently run. This legal position is not disputed by the learned counsel for the respondent/DDA, who, however, submits that by Notification No.II- 11017/7/91/DDIB dated 7 th May, 1999 realising the necessity of having nursing homes in residential areas, Government of India, Ministry of Urban Development, Delhi Division, permitted mixed land use, and by the Notification nursing homes, guest houses and banks were allowed to be run on residential plots of the minimum size of 209 sq. metres facing a minimum road width of 18 metres subject to the conditions laid down under guidelines issued in this regard. It is also not in dispute that the Medical Centre being run by the petitioners is in conformity with the conditions laid down in the said CRL.M.C. 2042/2007 Page No. 2 of 3 guidelines. The petitioners have placed on record the affidavit of the petitioner No.1 – Dr. Dinesh Gupta that the Medical Centre will be run by the petitioners in an area of 225 sq. metres. 3. The judgment in DMA Nursing Home (supra) has also been followed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in an unreported judgment in W.P. (Civil) 130/85 titled “Dr. M.L. Arora vs. Delhi Development Authority and Others” dated September 12, 2002. 4. In view of the aforesaid, the prayer made by the petitioners is granted and the proceedings pending in the Court of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate arising out of CC No.71/95 titled “DDA vs. Roopali Medical Centre” are quashed. CRL.M.C. 2042/2007 and Crl. M.A. 7259/2007 stand disposed of accordingly, leaving the parties to bear their own costs. REVA KHETRAPAL, J. APRIL 1, 2009 km CRL.M.C. 2042/2007 Page No. 3 of 3