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

HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
LIYAKAT ALI AND ORS(Not Applicable) – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF HP AND ORS(Not Applicable) – Respondent


Advocates:
['Prashant Sharma', 'AG', '', 'Lakshay Parihar']

J U D G M E N T

By way of this petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioners have prayed for quashing of a private Criminal Complaint No. 492/2013, titled as Karim Baksh Vs. Liyakat Ali and others, under Sections 452, 451, 324, 323, 447, 427, 149, 147, 148, 506 & 34 of the Indian Penal Code, which is pending before the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 1, Amb, District Una, H.P.

2. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned counsel for respondents No. 2 to 4 and learned Additional Advocate General.

3. Respondents No. 2 to 4, who are present in person in the Court, have been duly identified by their counsel Mr. Lakshay Parihar, Advocate. Their statements have also been separately recorded in the Court, wherein they have stated that they have entered into a compromise with the accused and they are not interested in pursuing the matter which led to the filing of a private Criminal Complaint No. 492/2013, titled as Karim Baksh Vs. Liyakat Ali and others, under Sections 452, 451, 324, 323, 447, 427, 149, 147, 148, 506 & 34 of the Indian Penal Code, which is pending before the Court of learned Addi

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