Full Text
Translation output
9#, 19 to 22# $~ HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CRL.M.C. 2265/2016
JITENDER SINGH Petitioner Represented by: Mr. Sajid Malik, Advocate.
CRL.M.C. 2265/2016
JITENDER SINGH Petitioner Represented by: Mr. Sajid Malik, Advocate.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF NOT OF DELHI Respondent Represented by: Mr. Kewal Singh Ahuja, AFP for the State.
CRL.M.C. 1635/2016
VERSUS
STATE (GOVT OF NOT OF DELHI) Respondent Represented by: Mr. Kewal Singh Ahuja, APP
CRL.M.C. 1782/2016
VERSUS
Represented by: Mr. Kewal Singh Ahuja, APP
CRL.M.C. 2065/2016
Represented by: Mr. SajidMalik, Advocate.
Represented by: Mr. SajidMalik, Advocate.
VERSUS
CRL.M.C. 2265/2016,1635/2016,1782/2016, 2065/2016&2089/2016 Page1of2
2016:DHC:9033 n THE STATE OF NOT OF DELHI ..... Respondent
Represented by: Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for the State.
2016:DHC:9033 n THE STATE OF NOT OF DELHI ..... Respondent
Represented by: Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for the State.
CRL.M.C. 2089/2016
Represented by: Mr. SajidMalik, Advocate.
Represented by: Mr. SajidMalik, Advocate.
VERSUS
Represented by: Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for the State.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
11.08.2016
11.08.2016
ORDER
1. By these petitions the petitioner has challenged different orders of the learned Trial Court dismissing his applications under Sections 311/91 Cr.P.C.
2. Learned APP for the State submits that the present petitions have become infructuous as the petitioner has already been convicted vide order dated U* August, 2016 by the learned Trial Court.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner also confirms thatthe petitioner has sincebeen convicted and the petitions havebecome infructuous.
4. Petitioners are dismissed as infructuous.
MUKTA GUPTA, J. AUGUST 11, 2016/'vn'