Prashant Yadav v. State NCT Of Delhi

$~31 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 756/2017 PRASHANT YADAV ..... Petitioner Through:

Ms. Tripti and Mr. Aman Chawla, Advocates

Versus

STATE NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through:

Mr. Rajat Katyal, Additional Public Prosecutor for State with SI Dharmendra Pratap Singh, P.S. Samaipur Badli.

Mr. Harsh Prabhakar, Advocate (DHCLSC) for Complainant with Complainant in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

O R D E R

% 02.11.2018 On 28.09.2018, this Court had passed the following order:- "

The petitioner has not paid to the respondent the accepted amount of Rs.9,000/- per month as maintenance for the past two months. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the money would be paid in a couple of days. Let the said monies be paid to the respondent directly into her bank account on or before 01.10.2018.

Additionally, the petitioner shall return all the belongings of the complainant as per the list, in usable condition or having the same economic value as per list when the said goods were bought. The learned counsel for the respondent submits that the said items, as offered by the petitioner, are neither usable nor of any economic value.

In the circumstance, it will be open to the petitioner to offer the monetary value of the goods/belongings to the complainant within 15 days from today.

The complainant's certificates of educational qualification, lying with the petitioner shall be returned to her by 15.10.2018.

At the petitioner's request, the case is referred back to the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre, where the parties shall appear before a Senior Mediator on 04.10.2018 at 3.00 pm.

List before Court on 31.10.2018.

Interim orders to continue."

Mr. Prabhakar, the learned counsel for the complainant submits that despite the aforesaid directions of this Court, nothing worthwhile has been offered by the petitioner to the complainant. Therefore, the petitioner has enjoyed the liberty granted by this Court without due compliance of its orders.

At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to withdraw the petition.

In the circumstance, the interim order dated 27.04.2017 stands vacated.

The petition is dismissed as withdrawn.

NAJMI WAZIRI, J.

NOVEMBER 02, 2018 sb