Petitioner sought quashing of an FIR for cheating under Article 226 and Section 482 Cr.P.C. The petitioner was absent. Counsel for the second respondent reported that the petitioner failed to comply with the compromise deed terms. The petition was dismissed in default.
Petition dismissed in default due to non-appearance of 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.
$~40
TARUN MIGLANI .....Petitioner
versus
THE STATE & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Amol Sinha, ASC for State with SI Satish Kumar, P.S.Sector 23, Dwarka. Mr. Arvind, Advocate for R-2.
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
%
O R D E R 19.09.2024
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J
SEPTEMBER 19, 2024 rk
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 04/07/2025 at 03:37:20
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to quash FIR No.0533/2019 for cheating and criminal conspiracy given non-compliance with the compromise deed.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Tarun Miglani
The State & Anr.
Neena Bansal Krishna
As recorded by the court registry
A constitutional writ petition in a criminal context, most commonly habeas corpus or a challenge to an FIR or detention order.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
