Dr. Ashish Prasad v. Satender Khari & ANR.
$~9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 14th February, 2025 + CONT.CAS(C) 1643/2024 DR. ASHISH PRASAD .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Aditya N. Prasad and Mr.
Pratyush Jain, Advocates.
versus SATENDER KHARI & ANR.
.....Respondent Through:
Mr. Abhinav Singh and Mr.
Praveen Kaushik, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1.
A status report has been handed over during the course of hearing. 2.
Let it be made part of record.
3.
Learned counsel for respondent also undertakes to send soft copy thereof to learned counsel for petitioner through e-mail during the course of the day.
4.
The contempt petition has been filed for the reason that despite there being specific directions given by the concerned Magisterial Court, the police officials of the concerned police station i.e. PS Prashant Vihar did not even bother to file any status report.
5.
Learned counsel for petitioner, however, submits that though, initially, no reports were filed by the police Authority before the concerned Magistrate Court but later on an untraced report has been filed by them and such CONT.CAS(C) 1643/2024 1 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL 11:12:20
untraced report has even been accepted by the learned Magistrate Court. He submits that the petitioner would take further action in the matter in accordance with law.
6.
It is noticed that when this matter was taken up on 16.10.2024, there was even a direction to bring the entire matter to the knowledge of the Commissioner of Police and according to learned counsel for respondent, the matter has already been brought to his notice. 7.
Be that as it may, keeping in mind the fact that the police has already filed untraced report before the concerned Court which has even been accepted, no useful purpose would be served by keeping this contempt petition pending.
8.
The petition, is accordingly, disposed of.
9.
All rights and contentions of parties are reserved. 10.
It is also clarified that this court has not made any observation with respect to the merits of the complaint made by the petitioner. (MANOJ JAIN) JUDGE FEBRUARY 14, 2025/sw CONT.CAS(C) 1643/2024 2 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL 11:12:20