Rohtash Tomar vs.state

Rohtash Tomar vs State

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Jan 07, 2019

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1220371

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1220371
Court: Delhi High Court
Decided On: Jan 07, 2019
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Rohtash Tomar

Respondent

State

Excerpt

* in the high court of delhi at new delhi date of order: january 07, 2019 + crl.m.c. 2/2019 rohtash tomar ........ petitioner state through: mr. jaideep malik, advocate versus through: ms. aasha tiwari, additional public prosecutor for respondent-state with si prem yadav ..... respondent coram: hon'ble mr. justice sunil gaur order (oral) crl.m.a. 11/2019 (u/s482cr.p.c.) allowed subject to all just exceptions. crl.m.c. 10/2019 & crl.m.a. 10/2019 (for stay) quashing of fir no.673/2015, under sections 186/353/2ipc, registered at police station nangloi, delhi is sought on the ground that without sanction under section 195 cr.p.c, charge under section 224 of ipc cannot be framed. to submit so, reliance is placed upon decisions of coordinate bench of this court in gurinder singh vs. state of delhi 1996 lawsuit (del) 463 and sushil sharma & anr. vs. state & anr. 2015 scc online del 7655. upon hearing and on perusal of charge and decisions cited, i find that the allegation against petitioner for the offences under section 186 crl.m.c. 2/2019 page 1 of 2 and 224 of ipc are not interwoven and so, reliance placed upon decisions in gurinder singh and sushil sharma (supra) is of no avail. the concurrent findings of the courts below do not suffer from any illegality or infirmity. in the considered opinion of this court, no case is made out for invoking extra-ordinary inherent jurisdiction under section 482 cr.p.c. to interfere with the impugned orders. this petition and application are accordingly dismissed. (sunil gaur) judge january07 2019 r crl.m.c. 2/2019 page 2 of 2

Full Judgment

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: January 07, 2019 + CRL.M.C. 2/2019 ROHTASH TOMAR ........ Petitioner

STATE Through: Mr. Jaideep Malik, Advocate Versus Through: Ms. Aasha Tiwari, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State with SI Prem Yadav ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER

(ORAL) Crl.M.A. 11/2019 (u/S482Cr.P.C.) Allowed subject to all just exceptions. CRL.M.C. 10/2019 & Crl.M.A. 10/2019 (for stay) Quashing of FIR No.673/2015, under Sections 186/353/2
IPC, registered at police station Nangloi, Delhi is sought on the ground that without sanction under Section 195 Cr.P.C, charge under Section 224 of IPC cannot be framed. To submit so, reliance is placed upon decisions of Coordinate Bench of this Court in Gurinder Singh Vs. State of Delhi 1996 LawSuit (Del) 463 and Sushil Sharma & Anr. Vs. State & Anr. 2015 SCC OnLine Del 7655. Upon hearing and on perusal of charge and decisions cited, I find that the allegation against petitioner for the offences under Section 186 Crl.M.C. 2/2019 Page 1 of 2 and 224 of IPC are not interwoven and so, reliance placed upon decisions in Gurinder Singh and Sushil Sharma (Supra) is of no avail. The concurrent findings of the courts below do not suffer from any illegality or infirmity. In the considered opinion of this Court, no case is made out for invoking extra-ordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to interfere with the impugned orders. This petition and application are accordingly dismissed. (SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE JANUARY07 2019 r Crl.M.C. 2/2019 Page 2 of 2

Same Court & Year Delhi · 2019 Same Parties Rohtash Tomar vs State Same Subject Land Acquisition