HC corrects typographical errors in Nishant Sharma-Sanjay Kundu case verdict; Core findings remain unchanged
Photo used for indicative purpose only. Source internet
Shimla, July 16
Himachal Pradesh High Court has corrected four typographical errors in its July 8 judgment disposing of the long-pending proceedings arising out of the dispute between Palampur-based businessman Nishant Sharma and former Director General of Police (DGP) Sanjay Kundu, while leaving the substantive findings of the 32-page verdict unchanged.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice G.S. Sandhawalia and Justice Bipin C. Negi allowed an application seeking correction of the judgment after counsel for the parties pointed out certain typographical mistakes. The court directed the Registry to carry out the necessary corrections in the judgment.
The court corrected the date of the alleged threat incident mentioned in paragraph 21 of the judgment from August 25, 2023 to October 27, 2023. It also corrected the shareholding of Keshav Dutt Shreedhar in the company operating Hotel Sai Gardens from 51 per cent to 50 per cent. Another correction clarified that it was Keshav Dutt Shreedhar, and not the complainant Nishant Sharma, who had acquaintance with Sanjay Kundu as recorded in paragraph 25.
Most significantly, the Bench amended paragraph 49 by correcting the observation to state that both the cases were conducted “with ulterior motive” instead of “without ulterior motive.”
In its original judgment, the High Court had held that no further orders were required in the proceedings initiated on Nishant Sharma’s representation and declined to continue monitoring the dispute.
The Bench observed that the controversy essentially arose out of a business dispute relating to partnership and ownership issues, and that the competent Magistrates were empowered to decide the cancellation reports filed by the Special Investigation Team (SIT).
The Magistrates were left free to accept the reports, take cognizance or order further investigation in accordance with law.
The High Court had accepted that the SIT had carried out a comprehensive investigation and found no reason to interfere with its conclusions.
The Bench observed that the investigation indicated the alleged intimidation case was linked to an ongoing business dispute and found no infirmity warranting further monitoring by the High Court.
With regard to the FIR lodged by former DGP Sanjay Kundu, the court noted that the allegations against Nishant Sharma arose from circulation of emails allegedly harming Kundu’s reputation. It held that the allegations did not disclose interference with the discharge of official duties by a police officer.
The investigating agency had rightly concluded that offences under Sections 327, 506, 120-B and 505 IPC were not made out and that, if any remedy survived, it lay in a private complaint for defamation under Sections 499 and 500 IPC.
The Division Bench also reiterated that both Nishant Sharma and Sanjay Kundu are at liberty to pursue their legal remedies before the competent Magistrates, including filing objections to the cancellation reports or taking recourse to any other remedy available under law.
Also Read
With the typographical corrections now incorporated, the judgment continues to govern the rights of the parties without any change in its substantive conclusions.
About the Author
