Suleicha Jangid v. State

Delhi High Court · 03 Dec 2018 · 2018:DHC:8257
Rekha Palli
CRL.M.C. 6093/2018 & CRL.M.A. 48596-48598/2018
2018:DHC:8257
criminal appeal_allowed

AI Summary

The High Court held that criminal miscellaneous petitions are not maintainable when an alternate remedy under Section 397 Cr.P.C. exists, allowed withdrawal with liberty to file revision petitions, and granted interim protection against coercive action.

Full Text
Translation output
A
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CRL.M.C. 6093/2018 & CRL.M.A. 48596-48598/2018
MRS. SULEICHA JANGID Petitioner
Through Mr.Ankit Anandraj Shah, Adv.
VERSUS
STATE & ANR. Respondent
Through Mr.Raghuvinder Verma, APP.
CRL.M.C. 6094/2018 & CRI..M.A. 48599-48601/2018
MRS. SULEKI-IA JANGID Petitioner
Through Mr.Ankit Anandraj Shah, Adv.
VERSUS
STATE & ANR. Respondent
Through Mr.Raghuvinder Verma, APP.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI
03.12.2018
ORDER

1. At the outset, Mr. Raghuvinder Verma, learned APP submits that the present petitions arc not maintainable as the petitioners have an alternate statutoiy remedy by way of a revision petition under Section 397 of the Cr.P.C.

2. In view of the aforesaid objection, learned counsel for the petitioners prays for leave to withdraw the present petitions with libcily to file revision petitions before the learned Additional Sessions 2018:DHC:8257 Judge. He, however, prays that in the interregnum, till the petitioner^ approach the learned ASJ, they may be granted interim protection so that no coercive action is taken against them.

3. Accordingly, while granting leave to the petitionei^to withdraw the present petitions with liberty as prayed for, it is directed that no coercive action be taken in terms of the order passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate for a period of four weeks.

4. The petitions are disposed of as withdrawn along with the pending applications.

DECEMBER 03,2018 sr