Full Text
Translation output
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
(i) + CRL.M.C. 3058/2012 ' DAMANJEET KAUR .... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Sushant Kumar, Advocate
(i) + CRL.M.C. 3058/2012 ' DAMANJEET KAUR .... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Sushant Kumar, Advocate
VERSUS
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Karan Singh, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-
State (ii) + CRL.M.C. 3372/2012 ANANT SINGH DHILLON .... Petitioner
Through: Mr. SushantKumar, Advocate
Through: Mr. Karan Singh, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-
State (ii) + CRL.M.C. 3372/2012 ANANT SINGH DHILLON .... Petitioner
Through: Mr. SushantKumar, Advocate
VERSUS
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents
CORAM:
Through: Mr. Karan Singh, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-
State ·
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
13.07.2015 In the above-captioned two petitions, quashing of complaint
No.36/l/2012 titled Ashwani Arya v. Mission Pmt.' Institute Pvt. Ltd &
Ors. on the basis ofwhich FIR No.166/2012 under Sections 406/420/467/
468/471/506/34/120-B of IPC registered at P.S. Janakpuri, Delhi, is sought on merits.
CRL.MC. 3058 & 3372 of2012 Page 1 )0 2015:DHC:11145
Since both these petitions arise out of one FIR, therefore, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, both these petitions are being taken up together and by this common order, they are being disposed of.
At the hearing, learned counsel for petitioners informs that the closure report has been filed in the aforesaid FIR case in which the aforesaid complaint has been merged.
In view of the aforesaid, the above captioned two petitions are disposed of as infructuous.
At this stage, learned counsel for petitioners submits that in the event of a protest petition being filed, liberty b~ granted to petitioners to e avail ofthe remedies as available in law. Needless to say, as and when the protest petition is filed by the complainant/first-informant of the FIR in question, then petitioners can always avail of the remedies as available in law to them.
JULY 13, 2015 s CRL.MC. 3058 & 3372 of2012 ~ (SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
Page2 2015:DHC:11145
State ·
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
13.07.2015 In the above-captioned two petitions, quashing of complaint
No.36/l/2012 titled Ashwani Arya v. Mission Pmt.' Institute Pvt. Ltd &
Ors. on the basis ofwhich FIR No.166/2012 under Sections 406/420/467/
468/471/506/34/120-B of IPC registered at P.S. Janakpuri, Delhi, is sought on merits.
CRL.MC. 3058 & 3372 of2012 Page 1 )0 2015:DHC:11145
Since both these petitions arise out of one FIR, therefore, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, both these petitions are being taken up together and by this common order, they are being disposed of.
At the hearing, learned counsel for petitioners informs that the closure report has been filed in the aforesaid FIR case in which the aforesaid complaint has been merged.
In view of the aforesaid, the above captioned two petitions are disposed of as infructuous.
At this stage, learned counsel for petitioners submits that in the event of a protest petition being filed, liberty b~ granted to petitioners to e avail ofthe remedies as available in law. Needless to say, as and when the protest petition is filed by the complainant/first-informant of the FIR in question, then petitioners can always avail of the remedies as available in law to them.
JULY 13, 2015 s CRL.MC. 3058 & 3372 of2012 ~ (SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
Page2 2015:DHC:11145
JUDGMENT