Parsi v. Harjit Singh

$~7 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CRL.REV.P. 2/2018, Crl. M.B. No. 1/2018 and Crl. M.A. no. 10/2018 PARSI ..... Petitioner Through Mr. David, brother -in-law and Ms.

Misal, daughter of the petitioner in person

Versus

HARJIT SINGH ..... Respondent Through Mr. A.K. Jain, Adv. with respondent in person

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK

O R D E R

% 03.04.2018 It is submitted that presence of the petitioner has been wrongly marked in the order dated 23rd January, 2018. Petitioner's brother-in-law, namely, David was present in Court on that day and not the petitioner. It is further submitted that petitioner is in jail. Respondent Harjit Singh is present in Court along with his counsel.

Daughter of petitioner, namely, Misal is also present in Court. It is submitted by the respondent that he has settled the matter with petitioner and he has no objection in case offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 ("the Act", for

short) is permitted to be compounded. In view of the settlement arrived at, offence under Section 138 of the Act is compounded. Petitioner is acquitted. Petitioner be released from jail, if not required in any other case. Petition is disposed of in the above terms. Miscellaneous applications are disposed of as infructuous. Dasti.

A.K. PATHAK, J.

APRIL 03, 2018 r.bararia