Full Text
Translation output
/ HIGH COURT OF DELHI
W.P.(CRL) 1290/2010
VLS FINANCE LTD & ANR
Through:
W.P.(CRL) 1290/2010
VLS FINANCE LTD & ANR
Through:
VERSUS
STATE& ORS
Through:
Through:
CORAM: ..... Petitioner Mr. Aman Lekhi, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Srishti Saxena and Mr. Ashok Kumar Sharma, Advocates. ..... Respondent
Mr. Rajesh Mahajan, Addl. Standing Counsel.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G. P. MITTAL
02.08.2011 W.P. (Crl.) No.1290/2010, Crl.
M.A. No.14336/2010 & 14337/2010
Learned Senior Counsel emphasized that the Petitioner has been constrained to move this court on account of repeated criminal complaints and FIRs based on the same allegations levelled by one or the other Respondents. Learned Senior Counsel further points out during the course of hearing that various miscellaneous proceedings under
Section 482 Cr.P.C. are pending in this court. In those proceedings the complaints and/ or FIRs instituted by the Respondents/ alleged Contemners have been questioned and by virtue of interim order the main proceedings have been stayed.
We are given to understand that criminal proceedings are at an advanced stage of hearing and are likely to be disposed of shortly. Having heard the learned Senior
W.P.(CRL) No.1290/2010 Page 1 of2 2011:DHC:18815-DB
Counsel, we are of the opinion that it would not be appropriate at this stage to entertain the present petition. Having regard to the outcome of the quashing proceedings instituted by the Petitioner under Section 482 Cr.P.C., it shall be open to it to apply for permission to institute fresh criminal contempt petition under Section 2 (c) of the Contempt of Courts
Act.
In view of the above observations, the petition and miscellaneous applications are disposed ofin the above terms.
AUGUST 02, 2011 hs W.P.(CRL) No.1290/2010 ~ S. RAVINDRA BRAT, J
~ G. P. MITTAL, J Page2 of2 2011:DHC:18815-DB
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G. P. MITTAL
02.08.2011 W.P. (Crl.) No.1290/2010, Crl.
M.A. No.14336/2010 & 14337/2010
Learned Senior Counsel emphasized that the Petitioner has been constrained to move this court on account of repeated criminal complaints and FIRs based on the same allegations levelled by one or the other Respondents. Learned Senior Counsel further points out during the course of hearing that various miscellaneous proceedings under
Section 482 Cr.P.C. are pending in this court. In those proceedings the complaints and/ or FIRs instituted by the Respondents/ alleged Contemners have been questioned and by virtue of interim order the main proceedings have been stayed.
We are given to understand that criminal proceedings are at an advanced stage of hearing and are likely to be disposed of shortly. Having heard the learned Senior
W.P.(CRL) No.1290/2010 Page 1 of2 2011:DHC:18815-DB
Counsel, we are of the opinion that it would not be appropriate at this stage to entertain the present petition. Having regard to the outcome of the quashing proceedings instituted by the Petitioner under Section 482 Cr.P.C., it shall be open to it to apply for permission to institute fresh criminal contempt petition under Section 2 (c) of the Contempt of Courts
Act.
In view of the above observations, the petition and miscellaneous applications are disposed ofin the above terms.
AUGUST 02, 2011 hs W.P.(CRL) No.1290/2010 ~ S. RAVINDRA BRAT, J
~ G. P. MITTAL, J Page2 of2 2011:DHC:18815-DB
JUDGMENT