Full Text
JUDGMENT
33. \ IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI \ + CRL REV. P. 756/2010 BHUPENDER SINGH Petitioner Through: Mr. Mahavir Sharma, Advocate.
VERSUS
STATE &ANR Respondents Through: Ms. Meera Bhatia, ASC for State with Mr. Roshan Kumar, Advocate for R-2 to R-4. CORAM: JUSTICE SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA ORDER % 06.12.2010 CrI.MA 18155/2010 (exemption) Application allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. CRLREV.P. 756/2010 and CrI. M.A. No. 18154/2010 (delay) This revision petition has been preferred against the order of learned Additional Sessions Judge in which directions to the SHO to examine the petitioner and examine Mr. M.S. Vats Returning Officerwere given. Counsel for the petitioner states that the directions of learned Additional Sessions Judge reflect as if the investigation of FIR l)lo. 327/2008 has been ordered. Iconsider this to be a misconception in the mind ^^f learned counsel for the petitioner. CRLREV.P. 756/2010 page 1of[2] 2010:DHC:10128 The directions clearly specify that it is the petitioner and the witnesses mentioned by the petitioner are to be examined by SHO and since the revision was in concern of the order passed in the complaint, the directions are in respect of the complaint only. With these observations, the petition and the pending application is dismissed.
SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA, J DECEMBER 06, 2010 CRLREV.P. 756/2010 page[2] of[2]