Manjula Krippender Final - 1
Manjula Krippender Final - 1
Manjula Krippender Final - 1
Petitioner
Versus
State
(Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.
Respondents
WITH
[CRL. M.P. NO.___________OF 2016]
[APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY
IN FILING SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION]
AND
[CRL. M.P. NO.___________OF 2016]
APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING CERTIFIED
COPY OF IMPUGNED FINAL ORDER DATED 29.06.2015
PAPER BOOKS
[FOR INDEX:: KINDLY SEE INSIDE]
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
S.No.
DATE OF RECORD OF
PROCEEDINGS
PAGES
INDEX
S.NO.
PARTICULARS
1.
2.
Listing Proforma
3.
4.
5.
6.
APPENDIX
i) Section 376 (2) (L) of IPC
ii) Section 482 of Cr.P.C
7.
ANNEXURE P-1:
True typed copy of the curriculum
vitae
of
mother
of
the
petitioner/prosecutrix dated Nil.
8.
ANNEXURE P-2:
True typed copy of the compilation of
complaints 16.07.2010
made
by
the mother of the petitioner to the
police authorities.
9.
ANNEXURE P-3:
True typed copy of the Complaint
dated 17.12.2010 submitted by the
mother of the petitioner before the
SHO, Defence Colony, New Delhi
PAGES
9.
ANNEXURE P-4:
True typed copy of the FIR No.
197/2014
dated
12.07.2014
registered by the police at Police
Station Defence Colony, New Delhi.
10.
ANNEXURE P-5:
True typed copy of the order dated
15.09.2014 passed by the Ld. Addl.
Sessions Judge, Saket Court, New
Delhi in C.C. No. 186/2014.
11.
ANNEXURE P-6:
True typed copy of the order dated
20.10.2014 passed by the Ld.
ASJ/Spl.
FTC),
Saket
Court
Complex, New Delhi in FIR No.
192/2014 registered at P.S. Defence
Colony, New Delhi
12.
ANNEXURE P-7:
True typed copy of the statement of
Dr. Roma Kumar of Sir Ganga Ram
Hospita,
New
Delhi
dated
15.05.2015 recorded by the Ld.
ASJ/Special, Fast Track Court,
Saket, New Delhi in CC No.
186/2014
13.
ANNEXURE P-8:
True typed copy of the Petition being
Crl.M.C. No. 2524/2015 dated
09.06.2015 filed by the petitioner
under Section 482 Cr.P.C. before the
Honble High Court of Delhi at New
Delhi.
14.
ANNEXURE P-9:
True typed copy of the order dated
15.06.2015 passed by the Honble
High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in
Crl.M.C.No. 2524/2015 along with
Cr. M.A. No. 8839/15 & 8918/15.
15.
16.
Petitioner
Versus
State
(Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.
Respondents
1.
2.
and
Final
Order
dated
29.06.2015
8839/15
&
8918/15
and
petition
for
NEW DELHI
DATED:
02.2016
SYNOPSIS
The present petition for Special Leave to Appeal is
directed against the Impugned Judgment and Final
Order dated 29.06.2015 passed by the Hon'ble High
Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Criminal M.C.No.
2524/2015 & Crl. M.As No. 8839/15 & 8918/15,
whereby the Honble High Court was pleased to dispose
of the Criminal M.C.No. 2524/2015 & Crl. M.As No.
8839/15 & 8918/15 of the petitioner.
It is respectfully submitted that in the present case
the petitioner who is represented by her mother Dr.
Manjula Krippendorf, who is an old lady and has given
several contributions to the health programmes of
Government of India and also served as a Commissioned
Medical Officer in the Army Medical Corps including
Combat
services
and
also
in
other
Govt.
Health
Organization.
It is respectfully submitted that the petitioner is of
38 years but she is suffering from Cerebral Palasy (R.
Hemiparesis), and a Mild-Iintellectual challenge. After the
heinous crime her communication level fell to that of a
child of 3-4 years and prior to the henious crime, she had
the developmental and communication level of 8-9 years.
It is respectfully submitted that the Accused
persons in the present matter committed a very serious
act which betrays the trust on humanity i.e. the very
serious offence under Section 376 (2) (L) of IPC with the
prosecutrix.The Accused Persons are monied people in
their locality due to which extraneous factor, they still
makes attempts to attack on the petitioner and her
mother which terrifies the prosecutrix and when any
complaint regarding the attack is made to the local
polices Station or the higher police authorities but no
mandatory step or action has been taken till date by the
police authorities concerned.
LIST OF DATES
The Petitioner is suffering from Cerebral
palsy (R Hemiparesis) and is a mildly
intellectually challenged child.
It is pertinent to mention here that
the mother of the petitioner is a eminent
and
reputed
doctor
having
great
has
assisted
in
several
health
of
Nil
the
is
petitioner/prosecutrix
annexed
herewith
and
the
three
local
police
officers
who
herewith
and
marked
as
AnnexureP/2 (Page
It is pertinent to mention here that
since 16.07.2010 to 07.07.2014, several
written complaints were forwarded from
time to time by the mother of the
proseuctrix regarding the attacks and
harassment
made
by
the
Accused
consequences
along
with
her
07.12.2010
On
07.12.2010,
mother
of
the
the
Complainant/
prosecutrix
filed
17.12.2010
report
to
SHO,
annexed
herewith
and
marked
as
09.07.2014
12.07.2014
Thereafter,
the
aforesaid
FIR
was
197/2014
dated
12.07.2014
31.07.2014
before
the
concerned
judicial
15.09.2014
recording
of
evidence
of
the
C.C.
No.
186/2014
is
annexed
under
the
20.10.2014
to
seek
police
protection/
compensation
for
heavy
cost
herewith
and
marked
as
Annexure-P/6 (page
It is pertinent to mention here that
the Ld. ASJ specifically observed that
Application
moved
on
behalf
of
the
building
their
names
being
to
seek
police
protection,
concerned do
14.11.2014
On
14.11.2014,
the
petitioner
was
Court,
and
an
exemption
was
12.02.2015
30.03.2015
31.03.2015
was
further
adjourned
for
Roma
Kumar,
Sr.
Consultant
186/2014
is
annexed
herewith
and
marked as AnnexureP/7(Page
Thereafter the version of I.O. was
recorded. Further, th3 mother of the
petitioner also pointed out the order
passed by the Ld. Predecessor dated
15.09.2014
wherein
it
has
been
mentioned
in
order
dated
the
accused
that
was
put
in
her.
trial
judge
thereafter
and
the
adjourned
case
was
because
the
Trial
because
repeated
was
listed
for
21.05.2015
&
the
relevant
AADI
and
submit
information
the
report
from
on
21.05.2015
of
Professor
Sagar,
order
already
passed
by
the
09.06.2015
a)
Court
under
POCSO
Act,
since
the
congenial
and
comfortable
Roma
Kumar,
Sr.
Consultant
entire
on
such
terms
and
e)
15.06.2015
through
Gestures.
True
by
Delhi at
the
New
Crl. M. C.
No.
Vide
impugned
final
order
dated
&
8918/15
of
petitioner.[IMPUGNED ORDER)
02.2016
the
Accused
Appellant Petitioner
VERSUS
1.
2.
State
(Govt. of NCT of Delhi)
Thr. Principal Home Secretary
A-Wing, 5th Floor,
Delhi Secretariat,
New Delhi-110003.
ProseRespondent
Cution
No. 1
Santosh Kumar Yadav,
Lodged in Central Jail,
Tihar, New Delhi.
Accused
Respondent
No. 2
TO
THE HONBLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA
AND HIS COMPANION JUDGES OF THE
Respondent
No.1
Respondent
No.2
and
Final
Order
dated
29.06.2015
2.
QUESTIONS OF LAW:
The
following
questions
of
law
arise
for
i)
ii)
age
of
8-10
years,
the
matter
be
iii)
the
fact
that
since
2010,
the
regarding
the
attacks
and
and
security
of
her
and
her
iv)
which
affected
the
health
and
mind
of
the
v)
the
fact
that
in
such
type
of
vi)
3.
Judgment
and
Final
Order
dated
4.
are
true
pleadings/documents,
typed
which
copy
form
part
of
the
of
the
5.
GROUNDS
A.
B.
the
heinous
crime
her
functional
and
age
of
8-10
years,
the
matter
be
C.
regarding
the
attacks
and
and
security
of
her
and
her
D.
effected
the
health
and
mind
of
the
E.
F.
6.
GROUNDS FOR INTERIM RELIEF:It is respectfully submitted that the Petitioner has
prima facie case as disclosed in the foregoing
paragraphs
and
the
petitioner
would
suffer
e)
MAIN PRAYER:
7.
Judgment
and
Final
Order
dated
8.
a)
under
POCSO
Act,
since
the
Supervision
of
the
present
case
be
MS AISHWARYA BHATI
ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER
DRAWN ON:
FILED ON
02.2016
02.2016
Petitioner
Versus
State
(Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.
Respondents
CERTIFICATE
Certified that the Special leave Petition is confined only to
the pleading before the Court whose order is challenged
and
the
other
documents
relied
upon
in
those
02.2016
FILED ON:
02.2016
MS AISHWARYA BHATI
ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER
Petitioner
Versus
State
(Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.
Respondents
2.
3.
account of
the
reasons
mentioned
across
following dates.
a)
13.01.2016
b)
15.01.2016
c)
01.02.2016
d)
Affidavit
16.02.2016
02.2016
of
the
petitioner
were
received.
e)
4.
intentional
nor
deliberate
and
hence
5.
Court,
irreparable
the
loss,
petitioner
hardship,
would
injuries
and
suffer
great
b)
MS AISHWARYA BHATI
ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER
DRAWN ON:
FILED ON:
02.2016
02.2016
Petitioner
Versus
State
(Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.
Respondents
TO
THE HONBLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA
AND HIS COMPANION JUSTICES OF THE
HONBLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
THE HUMBLE PETITION OF THE
PETITIONER ABOVE-NAMED
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
1.
2.
3.
4.
PRAYER
b)
MS AISHWARYA BHATI
ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER
DRAWN ON:
02.2016
FILED ON:
02.2016
Petitioner
VERSUS
1.
State
Through Standing Counsel
426, Lawyers Chambers,
Delhi High Court, New Delhi.
2.
Respondents
MS AISHWARYA BHATI
ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER
DRAWN ON:
FILED ON:
92.2016
02.2016
Petitioner
VERSUS
1.
State
Through Standing Counsel
426, Lawyers Chambers,
Delhi High Court, New Delhi.
2.
Respondents
MS AISHWARYA BHATI
ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER
DRAWN ON:
FILED ON:
92.2016
02.2016
Petitioner
VERSUS
1.
State
Through Standing Counsel
426, Lawyers Chambers,
Delhi High Court, New Delhi.
2.
Respondents
MS AISHWARYA BHATI
ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER
DRAWN ON:
FILED ON:
92.2016
02.2016
Petitioner
Versus
State
(Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.
Respondents
AFFIDAVIT
I, Dr. Manjula Krippendorf, R/o House No. B-56, Defence
Colony, New Delhi, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare
as under:
1.
2.
to
to
3.
4.
That
the
contents
of
the
aforesaid
SLP
and
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION:
Verified at New Delhi on this_______day of February,
2016 that the contents of the aforesaid affidavit are true
and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, no
part of it is false and no material has been concealed
therefrom.
DEPONENT