The court allowed the withdrawal of applications for restoration and delay in filing a petition for quashing. Parties were directed to file a fresh petition complying with the law.
Applications dismissed as withdrawn; parties allowed to file fresh petition for quashing.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
SHAKUN ANAND
07.02.2019 17:02
$~21
versus
THE STATE ( GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR..... Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP for the State with ASI Gian Chand, PS CWC Nanak Pura. Mr. D.C. Tripathi, Adv. for R-2 with R-2 in person.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA O R D E R % 31.01.2019
Crl.M.A.2258/2019 (for restoration) & Crl.M.A.2259/2019 (delay)
After some hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioners/applicants, on instructions, submits that he may be allowed to withdraw the present applications, the petitioners seeking liberty to file fresh petition for quashing on the basis of compromise.
The applications are dismissed as withdrawn.
The parties may file fresh petition for relief of quashing but in accordance with law.
R.K.GAUBA, J.
JANUARY 31, 2019 vk
Rajani Kant Rajnish & Ors.
The State (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) & Anr.
R.K. Gauba
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
