The High Court of Delhi, on an application invoking inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., quashed a summoning order against the petitioner. The order was quashed based on the consent and no objection from the second respondent in the underlying criminal complaint case.
Quashing of the summoning order dated 17.02.2016 against the petitioner.
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.
$~15
PAWAN KUMAR DHANUKA ..... Petitioner
versus
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 Pawan Kumar Dhanuka 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
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the summoning order against the petitioner in the underlying criminal complaint should be quashed given the respondent's consent.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Pawan Kumar Dhanuka
State
R.K. Gauba
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
