Full Text
Translation output
% 18.01.2011
Present: Mr. Chander M. Maini, Adv. for the Petitioner.
Mr. M.P. Singh, APP for the State with SI Ram Pal, P.S.
Uttam Nagar.
Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 in person.
+ Crl. M.C. No. 3828/2010
*
FIR in question was registered on the complaint of mother of respondent Nos. 2 and 3. It was alleged that petitioner had taken the premises on rent from the mother of respondent No. 2. Certain sewing machines, scissors, cutting tables etc. were lying in one room of the tenanted premises. While vacating the tenanted premises petitioner had taken away with him the aforesaid articles.
Mother of respondent Nos. 2 and 3 has since died. Petitioner and respondent Nos. 2 and 3 have now amicably settled their disputes.
In terms of the settlement, respondent Nos. 2 and 3, who are present in the Court, have no objection in case FIR in question is quashed.
In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the criminal case pending. In the larger interest, FIR No. 170/2004 under Sections
2011:DHC:8699
120-B/406/380 IPC registered at Police Station Uttam Nagar and the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.
Petition is disposed of in the above terms.
Dasti.
JANUARY 18, 2011 rb
A.K. PATHAK, J.
2011:DHC:8699
Present: Mr. Chander M. Maini, Adv. for the Petitioner.
Mr. M.P. Singh, APP for the State with SI Ram Pal, P.S.
Uttam Nagar.
Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 in person.
+ Crl. M.C. No. 3828/2010
*
FIR in question was registered on the complaint of mother of respondent Nos. 2 and 3. It was alleged that petitioner had taken the premises on rent from the mother of respondent No. 2. Certain sewing machines, scissors, cutting tables etc. were lying in one room of the tenanted premises. While vacating the tenanted premises petitioner had taken away with him the aforesaid articles.
Mother of respondent Nos. 2 and 3 has since died. Petitioner and respondent Nos. 2 and 3 have now amicably settled their disputes.
In terms of the settlement, respondent Nos. 2 and 3, who are present in the Court, have no objection in case FIR in question is quashed.
In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the criminal case pending. In the larger interest, FIR No. 170/2004 under Sections
2011:DHC:8699
120-B/406/380 IPC registered at Police Station Uttam Nagar and the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.
Petition is disposed of in the above terms.
Dasti.
JANUARY 18, 2011 rb
A.K. PATHAK, J.
2011:DHC:8699
JUDGMENT