SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

DELHI HIGH COURT
SURESH KUMAR KAIT
Kirpal Singh – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


Table of Content
1. petition for quashing of fir accepted. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. court finds no purpose in ongoing proceedings. (Para 4 , 8)
3. parties resolved the dispute amicably. (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
4. fir quashed as per mutual agreement. (Para 9)
5. petition allowed; order formalized. (Para 10 , 11 , 12)

JUDGMENT (Oral)

The hearing has been conducted through video conferencing.

1. Vide this petition, quashing of FIR No. 206/2010, under Sections 452/323/34 IPC, registered at police station Uttam Nagar, Delhi is sought by petitioners.

2. Notice issued.

3. Mr. Panna Lal Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1/State accepts notice and submits that respondent No.2 is present through video conference and he has been identified as the complainant of FIR in question by the Investigating Officer of this case, who is also present through video conferencing.

4. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the present petition is taken up for final hearing and disposal.

5. Petitioners and respondent No.2/complainant are neighbours. On 23-06-2010 at around 10:45 p.m. an altercation took place between the parties, which culminated into registration of FIR in

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top