Dismissed
Vinit Gupta v. Darshna Kumari
Punjab & Haryana HCCRM-M/34590/2010
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh…
What the court decided
AI extract
Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh…
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.
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
Criminal Misc. No.M-34590 of 2010
.....
Date of decision:9.12.2010
Vinit Gupta
.....Petitioner
v.
Darshana Kumari
.....Respondent
Present: Mr. Shalender Mohan, Advocate for the petitioner.
S.S. Saron, J.
Petitioner Vinit Gupta, proprietor M/s Gupta Waste Company had earlier filed Criminal Misc. No.M-18586 of 2010 seeking quashing of the complaint dated 15.4.2009 (Annexure-P.3 with the present petition) as also the summoning order dated 16.4.2009 passed by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Hansi in complaint case titled Smt. Darshana Rani v. M/s Gupta Waste Company and another. The said petition was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 1.11.2010 so as to enable the petitioner to file a fresh petition by giving better particulars.
In the present petition, there is no mention made to the earlier petition being withdrawn. The present petition has, however, been filed seeking quashing of the order dated 15.11.2010 (Annexure-P.9) whereby the application filed by the petitioner seeking permission to compound the offence after paying the cheque amount of 15,000/- and 1500/- as costs has been declined. The learned trial Magistrate in his order dated
Cr. Misc. No.M-34590 of 2010
[2]
15.11.2010 has inter alia observed that though the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is compoundable, however, the compounding of the offence is subject to agreement of the litigating parties and if one of the parties is not agreeable then there can be no compounding. It was observed that the complainant has stated that she did not want to compound the offence and the accused (petitioners) cannot compel her to compound the offence.
Learned counsel for the petitioner after arguing for some time submits that he may be allowed to withdraw this petition.
Dismissed as withdrawn.
December 9, 2010. (S.S. Saron) Judge hsp
Vinit Gupta
Darshana Kumari
S.S. Saron
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court