← Library
High Court of DelhiCRL.M.C./582/2016

Sanjeev Chopra & ORS v. State ( Govt Of NCT Of Delhi) & ANR

2016-05-06Hon'Ble Mr. Justice P.S.Teji2 pages

$~4 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CRL.M.C. 582/2016 & Crl.M.A. Nos.2456/2016 & 5304/2016 SANJEEV CHOPRA & ORS ..... Petitioners Through Mr.Rajesh Sharma, Adv.

versus STATE ( GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR ..... Respondent Through Ms.Manjeet Arya, APP for the State with SI Ram Phool, PS Paschim Vihar.

Mr.A.N. Aggarwal, Adv. for R-2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI

O R D E R

% 06.05.2016 The present petition has been filed by the petitioners under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of the FIR No.09/2012 registered under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC with Police Station Paschim Vihar.

The present petition came up for hearing on 12th February, 2016 when notice was issued to the respondents for 6th May, 2016. Thereafter, on an early hearing application, notice was issued to the respondents for 19th April, 2016. Thereafter, on 19th April, 2016 an application was moved and on a request made by both the counsel, the matter was referred to Delhi High Court Mediation & Conciliation Centre for 21st April, 2016.

It is an undisputed position that against the summoning order dated 12th December, 2014, revision was filed by the petitioners before the Court of Sessions which is pending and is listed on 9th May, 2016 and part arguments therein have already been heard. In the present scenario when the revision is already pending before the Court of Sessions for decision, this Court is of the considered opinion that no case is made out for invoking the jurisdiction under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure. This Court is further of the opinion that the discretion under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is not to be exercised to stop any Court to pass an order particularly when that order is not challenged before this Court. In such a scenario, the present petition and application are dismissed. However, the petitioners would be at liberty to have their remedy in accordance with law after the decision in the revision petition.

P.S.TEJI, J MAY 06, 2016/aa