Full Text
! Through: Mr. Atul Kumar, Advocate with Ms. Satinder Kaur (Petitioner
No.2 in person)
(NCT OF DELHI & ORS.) …..Respondent
^ Through: Mr. Amit Sharma, Addl.PP.
JUDGMENT
1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgment? No
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? No
3. Whether the Judgment should be reported in the Digest? No V.K.Jain, J. Crl.M.A. No. 11475/2009 in Crl.M.C. 1385/2009 This is an application for condonation of delay in refiling. For the reasons stated in the application, it is allowed. 2009:DHC:4463 Crl. M.C. No. 1385/2009 The application stands disposed of. Crl.M.A. 11476-78/2009 IN CRL.M.C. 1385/2009 The case of the applicant is that the petitioners No.1 had played a fraud upon her as well as upon the court by stating that she was now residing with him whereas in fact even at the time the FIR was quashed, she was not residing with petitioner No.1. If an order has been obtained from the court by playing fraud upon it or by mis-representation, the court has an inherent power to recall such an order. Hence, notice of the applications be issued to petitioner No.1, Kamal Preet Singh for 17.11.2009.
(V.K. JAIN) JUDGE October 26, 2009