The petitioner sought quashing of an FIR via a writ petition. As petitioners were declared absconders, the court took them into custody by the IO and disposed of the petition without merits, reserving rights to proceed further.
The petition was disposed of; petitioners were taken into custody; no substantive relief on quashing was granted.
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.
$~36
Through: Mr. Ankur Minocha and Mr. Gaurav Mahajan, Advocates.
versus
THE STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Rahul Tyagi, ASC for the State with SI Rajesh Kumar, P.S.:Mukherjee Nagar.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI O R D E R % 12.12.2024
By way of the present petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, the petitioners seek quashing of case FIR No. 346/2024 dated 08.05.2024 registered under sections 307/147/148/149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) at P.S.: Mukherjee Nagar, Delhi on the basis of a Compromise Deed dated 18.09.2024.
Page 1 of 2
W.P.(CRL) 2928/2024
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 03:42:51
ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J
DECEMBER 12, 2024 V.Rawat
Page 2 of 2
W.P.(CRL) 2928/2024
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 03:42:51
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Kuldeep & Ors.
The State NCT of Delhi and Ors.
Anup Jairam Bhambhani
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
