Full Text
Translation output
#22
% 04.08.2011
Present: Mr. Manoj Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Saleem Ahmed, ASC for the respondent No. 1/State.
None for the respondent No. 2 despite service.
+W.P. (Crl.) 1839/2010 & Cri.M.A. 18976/2010
This is a petition seeking quashing of FIR No. 166/2004, under Sections
498A/406/34 IPC registered at P.S. Rohini.
Learned Add I. Standing Counsel for the State informs that charge sheet has already been filed in the Trial Court. He submits that the offences under which the charge sheet has been filed, being warrant trial matters, the petitioners would get an opportunity of being heard on the point of charge in view of Section 239 CrPC. Thus, it is submitted that equally efficacious remedy is available to the petitioners, therefore, exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC is not called for.
I find merit in the submission made by learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State. Since the petitioners have equally efficacious remedy in the form of making submissions on the point of charge before the Trial Court, I am not inclined to invoke inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC, moreso, for the reason that the Trial Court will have benefit of perusal of the charge sheet including the evidence collected during investigation.
Petition is accordingly dismissed. The petitioners, may make all their factual and legal submissions before the Trial Court, which, I am sure shall be considered on merits.
AUGUST 04, 2011 akb
(AJIT BH~KE)
JUDGE
2011:DHC:18820
% 04.08.2011
Present: Mr. Manoj Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Saleem Ahmed, ASC for the respondent No. 1/State.
None for the respondent No. 2 despite service.
+W.P. (Crl.) 1839/2010 & Cri.M.A. 18976/2010
This is a petition seeking quashing of FIR No. 166/2004, under Sections
498A/406/34 IPC registered at P.S. Rohini.
Learned Add I. Standing Counsel for the State informs that charge sheet has already been filed in the Trial Court. He submits that the offences under which the charge sheet has been filed, being warrant trial matters, the petitioners would get an opportunity of being heard on the point of charge in view of Section 239 CrPC. Thus, it is submitted that equally efficacious remedy is available to the petitioners, therefore, exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC is not called for.
I find merit in the submission made by learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State. Since the petitioners have equally efficacious remedy in the form of making submissions on the point of charge before the Trial Court, I am not inclined to invoke inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC, moreso, for the reason that the Trial Court will have benefit of perusal of the charge sheet including the evidence collected during investigation.
Petition is accordingly dismissed. The petitioners, may make all their factual and legal submissions before the Trial Court, which, I am sure shall be considered on merits.
AUGUST 04, 2011 akb
(AJIT BH~KE)
JUDGE
2011:DHC:18820
JUDGMENT