Full Text
Translation output
_l :L s-73 HIGH COURT OF DELHI w.P.(cRL) rnsz}tr
PANKAJ JAIN & ANR ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Abhinit Das, Adv. VETSUS STATE & ANR ..... Respondent
Through \4r. Saleem Ahmed, ASC for State with Mr. Kumar Vijayendra, Adv. with Mr. Yogendra, SI.
PANKAJ JAIN & ANR ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Abhinit Das, Adv. VETSUS STATE & ANR ..... Respondent
Through \4r. Saleem Ahmed, ASC for State with Mr. Kumar Vijayendra, Adv. with Mr. Yogendra, SI.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA o Crl.M.A. 943712011
11.08.2011 Exernption allowed subject to just exception.
11.08.2011 Exernption allowed subject to just exception.
W.P.(CRL) 1115/2011 & Cr1.M.A. 943612011 (stay)
By this petition the Petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No. 738/04 under
Section 3841120-B IPC on the ground that the parties have amicably settled the matter. The Petitioner had earlier filed a petition for quashing on the basis of compromise. However, this courl dismissed the Petition on the ground that though it was a case of matrirnonial dispute however the parties w.P.(cRL) 111s/2011 page I of 2
2011:DHC:18897 q-/ 'ro have gone to the extent that one lady constable of Ghaziabad posed herself as Sub-Inspector and two sales-tax offtcers posed as Income-tax Inspectors and went to the house of the girl.
Thus, despite the matter being compromised this Court has declined to quash the FIR.
The present petition also seeks the same relief on the same grounds.
The only thing urged by the learned counsel for the Petitioner is that relevant documents were not filed in the earlier petition. This petition is clearly barred by principle of res-judicata and is not maintainable.
Petition and application are dismissed' W+-"'rL-
-MUKTA GUPTA'J AUGUST ll,20ll 'ga' w.P.(cRL) 111s/2011
2011:DHC:18897
By this petition the Petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No. 738/04 under
Section 3841120-B IPC on the ground that the parties have amicably settled the matter. The Petitioner had earlier filed a petition for quashing on the basis of compromise. However, this courl dismissed the Petition on the ground that though it was a case of matrirnonial dispute however the parties w.P.(cRL) 111s/2011 page I of 2
2011:DHC:18897 q-/ 'ro have gone to the extent that one lady constable of Ghaziabad posed herself as Sub-Inspector and two sales-tax offtcers posed as Income-tax Inspectors and went to the house of the girl.
Thus, despite the matter being compromised this Court has declined to quash the FIR.
The present petition also seeks the same relief on the same grounds.
The only thing urged by the learned counsel for the Petitioner is that relevant documents were not filed in the earlier petition. This petition is clearly barred by principle of res-judicata and is not maintainable.
Petition and application are dismissed' W+-"'rL-
-MUKTA GUPTA'J AUGUST ll,20ll 'ga' w.P.(cRL) 111s/2011
2011:DHC:18897
JUDGMENT