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
Nabi Alam – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


Table of Content
1. petitioners seek quashing of fir due to amicable settlement. (Para 1 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)
2. notice issued; hearing conducted with parties' presence. (Para 2 , 3 , 4)
3. court quashes fir as dispute resolved. (Para 9)
4. legal endorsement of quashing fir. (Para 10)
5. conclusion; order issued for immediate effect. (Para 11 , 12 , 13)

JUDGMENT (Oral)

The hearing has been conducted through video conferencing.

1. Vide the present petition, petitioners are seeking quashing of FIR No.265/20102016, registered at police station Jamia Nagar, New Delhi and all other proceedings arising therefrom.

2. Notice issued.

3. Mr. Izhar Ahmed, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State accepts notice and submits that respondent No.2 is present through video conferencing and she 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 the parties, the present petition is taken up for final hearing.

5. The marriage between petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 was solemnized on 26.02.2005 but due to temporal differences, they could not adjust together. On 10.05.2010,

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