Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 23178
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Girish Kathpalia, J
ANWAR KHAN – Appellant
Versus
MOHD SAMEER & ORS – Respondent
RC.REV. 475/2019
PETITIONER IN PERSON
The court permitted the withdrawal of perjury applications, affirming the petitioner's right to pursue further legal action against opposing counsel for alleged defamation.
Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 500 - Perjury proceedings - Petitioner sought initiation of perjury proceedings against opposing counsel for alleged defamation, which is punishable under Section 500 IPC - Petitioner requested to withdraw applications with liberty to file appropriate legal proceedings - Applications dismissed as withdrawn. (Paras 1-4)
(B) Legal Representation - The petitioner, while represented by counsel, was permitted to address the court in person, highlighting the importance of personal representation in legal proceedings. (Paras 2-3)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner filed applications seeking perjury proceedings against opposing counsel for defamation, represented by an advocate but chose to address the court personally.
Findings of Court:
The applications were dismissed as withdrawn, allowing the petitioner to file appropriate legal proceedings in the future.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner could withdraw the applications for perjury proceedings while retaining the right to file new legal actions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court allowed the withdrawal of applications, emphasizing the petitioner's right to pursue appropriate legal remedies against the opposing counsel.
Result: Applications dismissed as withdrawn.
% 15.04.2024 [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)]
- CM APPL. 21764/2024 (early hearing) & CM APPL. 21765/2024 (under Section 340 Cr.P.C. read with Section 500 of IPC with Section 151 CPC)
1. By these applications, the petitioner seeks initiation of perjury proceedings against counsel for the opposite side on the ground that the learned counsel has been defaming him in different courts, which is an offence punishable under Section 500 IPC. The applications were filed by the petitioner in person, though in the main proceeding he is represented by Mr. Sudhir Mendiratta, Advocate.
2. Today, Mr. Sudhir Mendiratta appeared with the petitioner/applicant but on being called upon to address on sustainability of these applications, Mr. Mendiratta, Advocate requested that petitioner be heard in person.
3. After addressing partly, the petitioner having discussed with his counsel present in Court room sought permission to withdraw these applications with liberty to file appropriate legal proceedings against the learned counsel for the opposite side. In that regard, the petitioner/applicant has also counter-signed this order sheet.
4. Accordingly, both these applications are dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as sought. List on the date already fixed before the Joint Registrar i.e., 02.05.2024.
