Full Text
Translation output
$'-8&9 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
W.P.(CRL) 46/2008
COL. RAGHUBIR SINGH & ORS Petitioners
Through: Mr.R.S.Jakhar, Advocate
W.P.(CRL) 46/2008
COL. RAGHUBIR SINGH & ORS Petitioners
Through: Mr.R.S.Jakhar, Advocate
VERSUS
STATE & ANR Respondents
Through: Mr.Saleem Ahmed, Addl. Standing Counsel with Ms/Charu Dalai, Advocate for
State/R-1 along with I.O. Inspector Anil Chauhan, P.S. Paschim Vihar, Delhi in person.
Mr.Rakesh Tiku, Sr. Advocate with Mr.Nitin Ahlawat, Advocate for R-2.
Through: Mr.Saleem Ahmed, Addl. Standing Counsel with Ms/Charu Dalai, Advocate for
State/R-1 along with I.O. Inspector Anil Chauhan, P.S. Paschim Vihar, Delhi in person.
Mr.Rakesh Tiku, Sr. Advocate with Mr.Nitin Ahlawat, Advocate for R-2.
AND
W.P.(CRL) 56/2013
DINESH CHOUDHARY
Petitioner
Through: Mr.R.S.Jakhar, Advocate.
DINESH CHOUDHARY
Petitioner
Through: Mr.R.S.Jakhar, Advocate.
VERSUS
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.
Respondents
Through: Mr.Saleem Ahmed, Addl. Standing Counsel with Ms/Charu Dalai, Advocate for
State/R-1 along with I.O. Inspector Anil Chauhan, P.S. Paschim Vihar, Delhi in person.
Mr.Rakesh Tiku, Sr. Advocate with Mr.Nitin Ahlawat, Advocate for R-2.
Respondents
Through: Mr.Saleem Ahmed, Addl. Standing Counsel with Ms/Charu Dalai, Advocate for
State/R-1 along with I.O. Inspector Anil Chauhan, P.S. Paschim Vihar, Delhi in person.
Mr.Rakesh Tiku, Sr. Advocate with Mr.Nitin Ahlawat, Advocate for R-2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI 2013:DHC:7532
16.05.2013 Counsel for the petitioner submits that he will be filing his vakalatnama during the course ofthe day.
On behalf of the State, it is submitted that charge-sheet in this case y has been filed on 08.03.2013.
In this view of the matter, counsel for the petitioner submits that since the petitioner has filed the above two petitions seeking quashing of FIR, the petitioners may be permitted to withdraw the same.
Writ petition as well as all pending applications stand dismissed as withdrawn. lTIBHA rani, j
MAY 16, 2013 'dc'P)
2013:DHC:7532
16.05.2013 Counsel for the petitioner submits that he will be filing his vakalatnama during the course ofthe day.
On behalf of the State, it is submitted that charge-sheet in this case y has been filed on 08.03.2013.
In this view of the matter, counsel for the petitioner submits that since the petitioner has filed the above two petitions seeking quashing of FIR, the petitioners may be permitted to withdraw the same.
Writ petition as well as all pending applications stand dismissed as withdrawn. lTIBHA rani, j
MAY 16, 2013 'dc'P)
2013:DHC:7532
JUDGMENT