← Library
High Court of DelhiW.P.(CRL)/1222/2025

Dinesh Chandra Agarwal & ANR. v. The State Of Tamil Nadu & ANR.

2025-08-19Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Ravinder Dudeja3 pages

$~18 & 19 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 1222/2025 DINESH CHANDRA AGARWAL & ANR.

.....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Sidhartha Luthra, Sr. Adv., Mr.

Tanvir Mir Ahmed, Sr. Adv., Mr.

Debmalya Banerjee, Mr.

Rohan Sharma, Ms. Apurva, Ms. Liza Vohra, Advs.

versus THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU & ANR.

.....Respondent Through:

Mr.

Sabarish Subramanian, Ms.Arpitha Anna Mathew Advs. for R-1.

Ms. Rupali Bandhopadhya, ASC with Mr. Abhijeet Kumar, Ms. Amisha Gupta Advs. for R-2.

+ W.P.(CRL) 1223/2025 PALLAVI DINODIA GUPTA & ORS.

.....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Sidhartha Luthra, Sr. Adv., Mr.

Tanvir Mir Ahmed, Sr. Adv., Mr.

Debmalya Banerjee, Mr.

Rohan Sharma, Ms. Apurva, Ms. Liza Vohra, Advs.

versus THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU & ANR.

.....Respondent Through:

Mr.

Sabarish Subramanian, The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

Ms.Arpitha Anna Mathew Advs. for R-1.

Ms. Rupali Bandhopadhya, ASC with Mr. Abhijeet Kumar, Ms. Amisha Gupta Advs. for R-2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

O R D E R

% 19.08.2025 W.P.(CRL) 1222/2025 & CRL.M.A. 11567/2025 (necessary orders), CRL.M.A. 11998/2025 (for permission to place subsequent facts) W.P.(CRL) 1223/2025 & CRL.M.A. 11571/2025 seeking necessary orders, CRL.M.A. 11995/2025 permission to place subsequent facts 1.

Ms. Arpita Anna Mathew Ld. Counsel/Advocate from the Office of Ld. Standing Counsel of the State of Tamil Nadu, submits that she has instructions to state that authorized representatives of India Mart International Ltd., of which the petitioners are the directors, have since joined the investigation. She further states that investigations is complete and final report is likely to be filed and as per her instructions no involvement of the petitioners have been found and they are not being sent to trial. She further states that notice issued under Section 35 BNSS has become infructuous and is not pressed.

2.

The statement made by Ld. Counsel appearing for respondent no. 1 is taken on record.

3.

In view of the aforesaid statement, made by the Ld. Counsel appearing for respondent no. 1 no further orders need to be passed in the The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

present petitions.

4.

Petitions accordingly stand disposed of.

5.

All the respective rights and contentions of the parties are kept reserved.

RAVINDER DUDEJA, J AUGUST 19, 2025/lks/na The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.