Pankaj Nagpal v. Majfish Tyagi

Delhi High Court · 06 Dec 2016 · 2016:DHC:9018
Mukta Gupta
CRL.M.C. 2736/2012
2016:DHC:9018
criminal petition_dismissed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court dismissed two criminal miscellaneous petitions for non-prosecution due to the petitioner's failure to deposit court-ordered costs.

Full Text
Translation output
V.
$~3&4 • - • • . ' , * IN THE HIGH GOURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
H-- CRL.M.C. 2736/2012 ' > • , ' ' • ^ .
PANKA.J NAGPAL Petitioner'
Represented by: None
.versus • , - .
MAJffiSH TYAGI ' Respondent
Represented by:
+ ' CRL.M.C. 2737/2012 - ; .
PANKAJ NAGPAL ' , • .....Petitioner
Represented by: None versus-
MAHESHTYAGI ^ \ ...., Respondent
Represented by:
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
% 06.12.2016
Despite pass-over none is present on behalf ofthe pietitioner. .
On the last date this Court has restored Crl.M.Cs; 2736/2012 and
2737/2012 to their original position subject to the petitioner depositing' a cost of ^10,000/- in each .case with the Delhi High Court Legal Services
Committee before this date. No proof of cost has been filed. '
Petitions are disinissed for non-prosecution.
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
DECEMBER 06, 2016 /'ga'
2016:DHC:9018
JUDGMENT