This Court declined to quash the FIR regarding Section 380 IPC involving a commercial transaction dispute. Liberty was granted to the petitioners, but the court explicitly stated it made no observation on the merits of the case.
The petition is dismissed; the FIR is not quashed; liberty is granted to approach the Court if necessary.
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.
$~27
Through: Mr. Durgesh Gupta, Advocate.
versus
STATE & ANR. & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Yudhvir Singh Chauhan, APP for the State. Ms. Monika Tyagi and Mr. Vijesh Vohra, Advocates for R-1 and R-2. SI Satyander, D-6769, ASI Krishan
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
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 02/07/2025 at 09:18:30
merits of the case.
SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J
SEPTEMBER 18, 2024 hsk
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 02/07/2025 at 09:18:30
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the FIR under Section 380 IPC should be quashed at this stage given the presence of a commercial transaction agreement.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Amajet & Anr.
State & Anr.
Subramonium Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
