1ddf1c23035ae04aa28a53a893ea85c013acef4f41bbeb62dadf08037e81d278

Delhi High Court · 27 Jul 2011 · 2011:DHC:10584
Ajit Bharthoke
Crl.M.C. No.2256/2010
2011:DHC:10584
criminal petition_dismissed

AI Summary

The High Court refused to quash an FIR after charges were framed, holding that the petitioner must challenge the framing of charges through appropriate legal remedies.

Full Text
Translation output
q
\
#10 o/o 27 .07 .2OlL
Present: Petitioner in person, Ms. Fizani Husain, APP for the respondent No.UState.
None for respondent No.2.
+Crl.M.C. No.225612O1O
This is a petition seeking quashing of FIR No.106/2005 registered under Sections 3241341.134 IPC P.S. Nand Nagri. lt is informed by
Ms.Fizani Husain, learned APP that on conclusion of investigation, charge sheet has already been filed in the court and the learned Trial Judge, after appreciating the evidence submitted along with the charge sheet has framed charges against the petitioner. lf at all, the petitioner is aggrieved of the framing of charge, he has a remedy in the form of revision against that order.
Accordingly, I am not inclined to invoke jurisdiction under Section
- 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the FlR. Petitioner.may avail of legal remedies available to him.
Petition stands disposed of.
(AJrT BHARTHOKE)
JUDGE
JULY 27, ZOLL ks
|rr
2011:DHC:10584
JUDGMENT