Full Text
Translation output
5- $-13 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CRL.L.P.757/2015
NEERAJ SAINI Petitioner
Through Mr.Ritesh Kumar Bahri,Mr.Vinay Gupta,Mr.Randeep Rehan and Mr. Ashwani Sharma,Advocates
CRL.L.P.757/2015
NEERAJ SAINI Petitioner
Through Mr.Ritesh Kumar Bahri,Mr.Vinay Gupta,Mr.Randeep Rehan and Mr. Ashwani Sharma,Advocates
VERSUS
GOPI RAM AGGARWAE Respondent
Through Respondentin-person
Through Respondentin-person
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL
10.03.2016
10.03.2016
CRL.L.P.757/2015
Mr. Gopi Ram Aggarwal, the respondent who appears in person invites my attention to the orders dated 18"" June, 2015 and 18'^ August, 2015 passed by the learned ACMM,Karkardooma Courts, Delhi whereby the leave petitioner was directed to pay costs in the sum of Rs.2,000/- and
Rs.5,000/- respectively to the respondent herein.
A sum ofRs. 7,000/- in compliance ofthe above directions has been handed over by the leave petitioner to Mr. Gopi Ram Aggarwal in Court today. The latter acknowledges the receipt thereof.
The present petition seeks leave to appeal against the impugned order dated 27^' August,2014 whereby criminal complaint being CC No. 165/15 under Section 138 ofthe Negotiable Instruments Act,1881 filed by the leave petitioner herein was dismissed for non-prosecution as well as for non-
2016:DHC:8893 appearance.
Notice.
Mr. Gopi Ram Aggarwal, the respondent who appears in person today,accepts notice and fairly does notopposethe presentleave petition.
Accordingly,the criminal leave petition is allowed.
The matter is directed to be registered as a criminal appeal.
Crl.Appeal No. /2016(to be numbered)
With the consent ofthe parties,the appeal is heard and disposed ofby way ofthis order.
A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the complainant
(appellant herein)has been remiss in prosecuting his complaint filed before the concerned Court. Consequently, the complaint has been dismissed as aforesaid.
Mr. Gopi Ram Aggarwal, the respondent herein however states that he would have no objection if the present appeal is allowed and the complaint filed on behalfofthe appellant herein is restored to the file ofthe concerned Magistrateforfurther proceedings in accordance with law.
In the present case, it is observed that the complaint has not been heard or adjudicated on merits.
In my view,therefore,an opportunity must be granted to the appellant to prosecute his complaint before the concerned court.
The appeal is,therefore,allowed.
The criminal complaint being CC No. 165/15 is restored to the file of the concerned Magistrate, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi, subject to payment ofRs.5,000/- as costs to the respondent herein.
It is made clear that this is the final opportunity granted to the appellant to prosecute his complaint. No further opportunities shall be granted in the case.
The concerned Magistrate shall ensure that the case is determined as expeditiously as possible.
List the matter on 22"'' April,2016 before the concerned Magistrate, Karkardooma Courts,Delhifor further proceedings.
The appeal is disposed ofaccordingly.
Copy ofthis order be sent to the concerned Magistrate, Karkardooma
Courts,Delhi for information and compliance.
MARCH 10,2016 sd
—'A
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL,J
Mr. Gopi Ram Aggarwal, the respondent who appears in person invites my attention to the orders dated 18"" June, 2015 and 18'^ August, 2015 passed by the learned ACMM,Karkardooma Courts, Delhi whereby the leave petitioner was directed to pay costs in the sum of Rs.2,000/- and
Rs.5,000/- respectively to the respondent herein.
A sum ofRs. 7,000/- in compliance ofthe above directions has been handed over by the leave petitioner to Mr. Gopi Ram Aggarwal in Court today. The latter acknowledges the receipt thereof.
The present petition seeks leave to appeal against the impugned order dated 27^' August,2014 whereby criminal complaint being CC No. 165/15 under Section 138 ofthe Negotiable Instruments Act,1881 filed by the leave petitioner herein was dismissed for non-prosecution as well as for non-
2016:DHC:8893 appearance.
Notice.
Mr. Gopi Ram Aggarwal, the respondent who appears in person today,accepts notice and fairly does notopposethe presentleave petition.
Accordingly,the criminal leave petition is allowed.
The matter is directed to be registered as a criminal appeal.
Crl.Appeal No. /2016(to be numbered)
With the consent ofthe parties,the appeal is heard and disposed ofby way ofthis order.
A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the complainant
(appellant herein)has been remiss in prosecuting his complaint filed before the concerned Court. Consequently, the complaint has been dismissed as aforesaid.
Mr. Gopi Ram Aggarwal, the respondent herein however states that he would have no objection if the present appeal is allowed and the complaint filed on behalfofthe appellant herein is restored to the file ofthe concerned Magistrateforfurther proceedings in accordance with law.
In the present case, it is observed that the complaint has not been heard or adjudicated on merits.
In my view,therefore,an opportunity must be granted to the appellant to prosecute his complaint before the concerned court.
The appeal is,therefore,allowed.
The criminal complaint being CC No. 165/15 is restored to the file of the concerned Magistrate, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi, subject to payment ofRs.5,000/- as costs to the respondent herein.
It is made clear that this is the final opportunity granted to the appellant to prosecute his complaint. No further opportunities shall be granted in the case.
The concerned Magistrate shall ensure that the case is determined as expeditiously as possible.
List the matter on 22"'' April,2016 before the concerned Magistrate, Karkardooma Courts,Delhifor further proceedings.
The appeal is disposed ofaccordingly.
Copy ofthis order be sent to the concerned Magistrate, Karkardooma
Courts,Delhi for information and compliance.
MARCH 10,2016 sd
—'A
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL,J
JUDGMENT