Ajay Sharma v. The State & ANR

5# $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 1013/2016 AJAY SHARMA ..... Petitioner Represented by:

Mr. Satish Tamta, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Abhishek Vikram, Advocate.

versus THE STATE & ANR ..... Respondents Represented by:

Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for the State with SI Inderveer Singh, PS Karawal Nagar.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

O R D E R

% 07.02.2017 1.

Status report has been filed.

2.

As per the status report the date of birth of the prosecutrix was registered by the Registrar of Deaths and Birth, that is, the concerned authority of MCD after one year of the birth of the prosecutrix pursuant to an order passed by the SDM.

3.

Notice in the petition was issued on 20th July, 2016 where learned counsel for the petitioner had submitted that contrary to the notification dated 31st December, 1999 notifying rules under Section 30 of the Registration of Birth and Death Act, 1969 the Registrar of Birth and Death suo-moto entered the date of birth of the prosecutrix in the record without any order from the Magistrate.

4.

In view of the status report filed, learned Senior Counsel for the CRL.M.C. 1013/2016

petitioner seeks leave to withdraw the present petition with liberty to crossexamine relevant witnesses to challenge the authenticity of the date of birth entered in the record.

5.

Petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed. MUKTA GUPTA, J.

FEBRUARY 07, 2017 'vn'

CRL.M.C. 1013/2016