Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Dharam Singh Vs. State and anr

Dharam Singh vs State and anr

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Nov 24, 2011
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/922590

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

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Delhi High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
CRL.M.C. No. 4551 of 2006
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

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

Criminal

Key legal issue
Criminal
Acts & sections
Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Section 420

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Dharam Singh

Respondent

State and anr

Legal References

Acts
Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Section 420

Excerpt

1. instant petition has been preferred by the petitioner against the impugned order 22.05.1999 whereby learned trial court has issued summons against the petitioner for the offence under section 420 indian penal code in the complaint case filed by respondent no.2.2. he further submits that petitioner and respondent no.2 are real brothers and now they have amicably settled all the issues qua the present complaint case and respondent no.2 does not wish to pursue his case any further.3. respondent no.2 is personally present in the court and has been duly identified by his counsel mr.s. k. runga, learned senior advocate. on instructions, learned senior advocate submits that all the issues with respect to present complaint case has been settled with the petitioner and respondent no.2 does not wish to pursue his case no more and wishes to withdraw the same having been amicably settled.4. mr.navin sharma, learned app for state submits that being the complaint case, he has no objection if the instant petition is allowed.5. i note that vide the impugned order, learned trial court has issued the summons to petitioner in a criminal complaint case preferred by and respondent no.2. pursuant to amicable settlement, respondent no.2 wishes to withdraw the same. there seems to be no legal embargo that the complaint case cannot be withdrawn by the complainant.6. keeping the settlement between the petitioner and respondent no.2 into view, the criminal complaint case filed by respondent no.2 against petitioner stands withdrawn. consequently, petitioner stands discharged therefrom.7. accordingly, criminal m.c.no.4551/2006 stands allowed and disposed of.8. in view of above, order, criminal m.a.7683/2006 becomes infructuous and accordingly, stands disposed of as such.9. no order as to costs.10. dasti.

Full Judgment

1. Instant petition has been preferred by the petitioner against the impugned order 22.05.1999 whereby learned Trial Court has issued summons against the petitioner for the offence under Section 420 Indian Penal Code in the complaint case filed by respondent No.2.

2. He further submits that petitioner and respondent No.2 are real brothers and now they have amicably settled all the issues qua the present complaint case and respondent No.2 does not wish to pursue his case any further.

3. Respondent No.2 is personally present in the Court and has been duly identified by his counsel Mr.S. K. Runga, learned Senior Advocate. On instructions, learned Senior Advocate submits that all the issues with respect to present complaint case has been settled with the petitioner and respondent No.2 does not wish to pursue his case no more and wishes to withdraw the same having been amicably settled.

4. Mr.Navin Sharma, learned APP for State submits that being the complaint case, he has no objection if the instant petition is allowed.

5. I note that vide the impugned order, learned Trial Court has issued the summons to petitioner in a criminal complaint case preferred by and respondent No.2. Pursuant to amicable settlement, respondent No.2 wishes to withdraw the same. There seems to be no legal embargo that the complaint case cannot be withdrawn by the complainant.

6. Keeping the settlement between the petitioner and respondent No.2 into view, the criminal complaint case filed by respondent No.2 against petitioner stands withdrawn. Consequently, petitioner stands discharged therefrom.

7. Accordingly, Criminal M.C.No.4551/2006 stands allowed and disposed of.

8. In view of above, order, Criminal M.A.7683/2006 becomes infructuous and accordingly, stands disposed of as such.

9. No order as to costs.

10. Dasti.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial