Full Text
VIKRaM SACHDEVA &ANR Petitioners
Through: Mr.Mukul Talwar, Sr.Advocatewith Mi.Sunil Kumar, Advocate
Through : Mr.Amit Ahlawat CRL.R£V.P. 437/2015 &
CRL.M.A.No.9960/2015 VIKRAM SACHDEVA Petitioner hrough: Mr.Muku| Talwar, Sr.Advocatewith
Mr.Sum] Kumar, Advocate.
Through : Mr.Amit Ahlawat, Mr with MnPulkit Aggarwal, Advocate for the complamam along with complainant
Shyam Sunder Aggarwal.
CRLM.A.No.9962/2015 VIKRAM SACHDEVA &ANR ..
Petitioners Mr.Sunil Kumar, Advocate
2015:DHC:11249 STATE (GNCTOF DELHI) Respondent
Through : Mr.Amit Ahlawat, APP.
Ms.Uma Aggarwal, Advocate with Mr.Pulkit Aggarwal, Advocate for the complainant along with complainant
- Shyam Sunder Aggarwal.
13.08.2015
ORDER
1. Present revision petitions have been preferred by the petitioners challenge the legality and correctness ofan order dated 29.06.2015 of learned Metropolitan Magistrate whereby non-bailable warrants were issued against the petitioners and proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C. were declined to be stayed. Petitions are contested by the complainant / respondent No.2.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the record. Needless to say, petitioners were at fault to remain absent for so long in the Trial Court proceedings. The Court below had no alternative but to initiate coercive steps to secure their presence.
3. On 15.06.2015, the petitioners filed Crl.M.C.No.2527/2015. By an order dated 15.06.2015, the petitioners were granted interim protection till they approached the Trial Court for cancellation ofnonbailable wan-ants. The Trail Court by the impugned order dismissed their applications.
4. Durmg the course ofhearing, learned Senior Counsel for the CRL.REV.P. 436/2015& connectedmatters ^ petitioners stated that without fail the petitioners would put appearance before the Trial Court on the date fixed i.e. 14.09.2015. Learned counsel for the complainant has no objection to allow the petitions, on the assurance of the petitioners to appear on the said date before the Trial Court subject to their paying reasonable costs.
5. Considering the-facts and circumstances, the petitioners are directed to appear before the Trial Court on 14.09.2015. In case of non-compliance, the Trial Court will be at liberty to take coercive steps to secure their presence. Petitioner shall not seek unreasonable adjournment (s) during trial. They shall pay ^ 40,000/- in all as costs to the complainant; ? 25,000/- shall be taken by the complainant - Shyam Sunder Aggarwal and ? 15,000/- - Kajal Aggarwal. The petitioners shall furnish their complete permanent and temporary addresses with telephone numbers.
6. Proceedings initiated under Section 82 Cr.P.C. etc. against the petitioners stand withdrawn.
7. The revision petitions stand disposed of in the above terms. Trial Court record (if any) be sent back immediately with the copy of the order. Pending applications also stand disposed of. ^.GARG,J AUGUST 13, 2015 / tr CRL.REV.P. 436/2015 & connected matters page 3 of[3]