Full Text
Translation output
$-14 W HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CRL.L.P. 176/2014
HAMDARD(WAKAF)LABORATORIES Petitioner
Through Mr.Ravi Sikri,Mr.Sumel Khanna and Mr.Deeponk Yadav,Advocates
CRL.L.P. 176/2014
HAMDARD(WAKAF)LABORATORIES Petitioner
Through Mr.Ravi Sikri,Mr.Sumel Khanna and Mr.Deeponk Yadav,Advocates
VERSUS
RAKESH ARORA Respondent
Through Mr.Rohit Gandhi,Advocate
Through Mr.Rohit Gandhi,Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL
08.01.2016 Having heard learned counsel appearing on behalf ofthe parties, the
Court is ofthe view that there are sufficient grounds for grant of leave to appeal. Accordingly,the criminal leave petition is allowed.
The matter is directed to be registered as a criminal appeal.
CRL.A. ^3 72016(To be numberedl After hearing learned counsel appearing on behalf ofthe parties, the present appeal is being disposed ofby this order.
The present appellant assails the order dated 12''' December, 2013 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, Negotiable Instruments Act,(West), Delhi,dismissing the complaint being Criminal Complaint Case No.2175/1 filed on behalfofthe appellant under Section 138 ofthe NI Act,on account of the circumstance that the appellant was unable to serve the respondent herein despite repeated opportunities.
2016:DHC:8889 t)
As is evident from a perusal of the order impugned in the present appeal,the complaint filed on behalfofthe appellant had not been heard or adjudicated on merits. In my considered view, an opportunity must be granted to the complainant to prosecute the complaint before the concerned
Magistrate especially in view of the circumstance that the respondent has now appeared before this Court.
The present appeal is consequently allowed.
The impugned order dated 12"^ December,2013 is set aside.
The Criminal Complaint Case No.2175/1 filed under Section 138 of the N1 Act titled Hamdarad (Wakaf) Laboratories vs. Rakesh Arora is remanded back to the Court ofthe concerned Magistrate for adjudication on merits, subject to payment of Rs. 10,000/- as costs to be paid to the respondent within a period oftwo weeksfrom today.
List the matter before the concerned Magistrate on 2"^* March,2016 for hearing and adjudication ofthe complaint case as afore-stated on merits in accordance with law.
JANUARY 08,2016 sd
—A
SIDmiARTH MRIDUL,J h>cXU(r^.O', r ■■T'f—- .
5!:< Ac i.A- c. ^ ^ ^ 2016:DHC:8889
08.01.2016 Having heard learned counsel appearing on behalf ofthe parties, the
Court is ofthe view that there are sufficient grounds for grant of leave to appeal. Accordingly,the criminal leave petition is allowed.
The matter is directed to be registered as a criminal appeal.
CRL.A. ^3 72016(To be numberedl After hearing learned counsel appearing on behalf ofthe parties, the present appeal is being disposed ofby this order.
The present appellant assails the order dated 12''' December, 2013 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, Negotiable Instruments Act,(West), Delhi,dismissing the complaint being Criminal Complaint Case No.2175/1 filed on behalfofthe appellant under Section 138 ofthe NI Act,on account of the circumstance that the appellant was unable to serve the respondent herein despite repeated opportunities.
2016:DHC:8889 t)
As is evident from a perusal of the order impugned in the present appeal,the complaint filed on behalfofthe appellant had not been heard or adjudicated on merits. In my considered view, an opportunity must be granted to the complainant to prosecute the complaint before the concerned
Magistrate especially in view of the circumstance that the respondent has now appeared before this Court.
The present appeal is consequently allowed.
The impugned order dated 12"^ December,2013 is set aside.
The Criminal Complaint Case No.2175/1 filed under Section 138 of the N1 Act titled Hamdarad (Wakaf) Laboratories vs. Rakesh Arora is remanded back to the Court ofthe concerned Magistrate for adjudication on merits, subject to payment of Rs. 10,000/- as costs to be paid to the respondent within a period oftwo weeksfrom today.
List the matter before the concerned Magistrate on 2"^* March,2016 for hearing and adjudication ofthe complaint case as afore-stated on merits in accordance with law.
JANUARY 08,2016 sd
—A
SIDmiARTH MRIDUL,J h>cXU(r^.O', r ■■T'f—- .
5!:< Ac i.A- c. ^ ^ ^ 2016:DHC:8889
JUDGMENT