The court quashed a summoning order dated 17.02.2016 issued against the petitioner in a criminal complaint case based on the complainant's no objection and consent under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and disposed of the petition.
Summoning order against the petitioner dated 17.02.2016 in criminal complaint case no. 56330/2016 is hereby quashed.
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.
$~14
RAJ KUMAR SINGHANIA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Vishwendra Verma, Adv.
versus
STATE & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP for the State. Mr. Akshay Bhatia & Mr. Avinash Das, Advs. for R-2.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA
O R D E R
% 12.11.2018
The second respondent present through Mr. Akshay Bhatia, Advocate wants to make a statement which is recorded separately.
The second respondent (complainant) having given its no objection and consent to the prayer in the petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the summoning order dated 17.02.2016 against the petitioner Raj Kumar Singhania in criminal complaint case no. 56330/2016 titled M/s G.H. Textiles and Sarees vs. M/s Shyam Retails (India) Pvt. Ltd. is hereby quashed.
The petition with pending application is disposed of accordingly.
R.K.GAUBA, J
NOVEMBER 12, 2018 nk
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the summoning order against the petitioner in the underlying criminal complaint should be quashed upon the complainant's no-objection?
Whether to dispose of the petition with the pending application?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Raj Kumar Singhania
State
Anr.
R.K. Gauba
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
