Jyoti Sarvo Priya Construction Pvt Ltd v. State Of NCT Of Delhi& ORS
$~6 & 7 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 1803/2018 and Crl.M.A.No.6442/2018 JYOTI SARVO PRIYA CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD. ..... Petitioner Through:
Mr.Vijay Aggarwal, Mr.Shailesh Pandey, Mr.Deepanshu Choithani and Mr.Shekher Pathak, Advocates.
versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR ..... Respondents Through:
Ms.Radhika Kolluru, APP for State/R-1.
Mr.Dhruv Gupta, Advocate for R-2/complainant.
+ CRL.M.C. 2525/2018 JYOTI SARVO PRIYA CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD. ..... Petitioner Through:
Mr.Vijay Aggarwal, Mr.Shailesh Pandey, Mr.Deepanshu Choithani and Mr.Shekher Pathak, Advocates.
versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.
..... Respondents Through:
Ms.Radhika Kolluru, APP for State/R-1.
Mr.Dhruv Gupta, Advocate for R-2/complainant.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI (VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING)
O R D E R
% 08.07.2020 CRL.M.A.8847/2020 (Exemption) in CRL.M.C. 1803/2018 CRL.M.A.8849/2020 (Exemption) in CRL.M.C. 2525/2018 1.
Exemption is allowed, subject to the condition that the petitioner will file the duly sworn/attested affidavit and the requisite court fee within 72
hours from the date of resumption of the regular functioning of this Court. 2.
The applications stand disposed of.
CRL.M.A.8846/2020 in CRL.M.C.1803/2018 CRL.M.A.8848/2020 in CRL.M.C. 2525/2018 1.
The present applications have been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking permission to withdraw the petitions on the ground of amicable settlement having been arrived at between the parties. 2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter in dispute has been amicably settled between the parties. He accordingly seeks leave to withdraw the present petitions.
3.
Learned counsel for respondent No.2/complainant confirms the factum of amicable settlement between the parties and submits that he has no objection if the petitioner is permitted to withdraw the petition. 4.
In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and for the reasons stated in the applications, the prayer made in the applications is allowed.
5.
The applications stand disposed of.
CRL.M.C.1803/2018 & CRL.M.C. 2525/2018 1.
In view of the aforesaid, leave, as prayed for, is granted and both the petitions are dismissed as withdrawn.
2.
Pending application also stands dismissed as withdrawn. The date already fixed in these petitions stands cancelled and need not be listed on the said date.
MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J JULY 08, 2020/'dc'