Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 27.11.2019
SMT. RITIKA JUNEJA ..... Petitioner
Through Dr. M. K. Gahlaut, Adv. with father of petitioner in person
Through Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for State Insp. Narender, SI Sangeeta, DIU/NW
JUDGMENT
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. Application is disposed of.
3. Vide the present petition, the petitioner seeks direction thereby quashing and setting aside the order dated 29.04.2019 passed by the learned 2019:DHC:6431 Addl. Sessions Judge, North West, Rohini, Delhi in FIR no. 985/15 registered at P.S. Shalimar Bagh for the offences punishable under sections 498A/406/506/377/307/34 IPC to the extent that the petitioner / complainant and her father have voluntarily submitted that they will not communicate with Shapoorji Pallonji Forbes Technosys in respect of pending cases against the accused Anshuman Narang.
4. Notice issued.
5. Notice is accepted by learned APP for the State.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner never communicated with Shapoorji Pallonji Forbes Technosys nor they have any intention to communicate with it in respect of pending cases against the accused, Anshuman Narang and they have voluntarily made submissions before the learned Trial Court which has been duly recorded by the Court in its observation. He reiterated that neither in the past nor in the future, the petitioner and her father intend to communicate with Shapoorji Pallonji Forbes Technosys, except for the service of notice of appeal under Section 29 D. V. Act, filed by them. He, therefore, prays that the said portion be deleted from the impugned order passed by the Trial Court on 29.04.2019 are as under:- “Complainant and her father have voluntarily submitted that they will not communicate with Shapoorji Forbes Technosys in respect of pending cases against the accused Anshuman Narang.”
7. As stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner before this Court, on instructions from the father of the petitioner, that neither the petitioner nor he (father of the petitioner) will communicate with Shapoorji Forbes Technosys, regarding pending cases against the accused Anshuman Narang, who is husband of the petitioner. Therefore, the observation recorded above in the impugned order do not prejudice the petitioner in any manner.
8. No further directions are required to be passed in the present petition. The petition is disposed of accordingly along with the pending application. Order dasti, under the signature of Court Master.
JUDGE NOVEMBER 27, 2019 sm