Ram Awadh Pandey vs Piyush
2010 Latest Caselaw 3298 Del

               * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                                Date of Reserve: 6th July, 2010
                                                  Date of Order: July 15, 2010

Crl. M.C. No. 1596/2009, Crl. M.A. No. 5746/2009
%
                                                                      15.07.2010

RAM AWADH PANDEY                                     ... Petitioner
                           Through: Mr. Sanjay Garg, Adv.

             Versus

PIYUSH                                                    ... Respondents
                           Through: Nemo.


JUSTICE SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA

1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2. To be referred to the reporter or not?

3. Whether judgment should be reported in Digest?

JUDGMENT

1. By this petition under section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner has assailed

order dated 14th July, 2008 passed by learned ASJ in a Revision Petition.

2. Brief facts relevant for the purpose of deciding this petition are that the

petitioner, an Advocate, filed complaint before the court of learned M.M. in

his personal capacity as complainant. Learned M.M. dismissed the complaint

finding that there was no substance in the complaint.

3. Against the order of learned M.M., the petitioner preferred a revision

before learned ASJ. Learned ASJ, after going through the facts of the case,

came to conclusion that the order of learned M.M. was as per law and there

was no substance in the complaint.

4. The complaint was filed by the petitioner that a pro-note and cheque

was got signed from him without making him payment of the pro-note

amount. These allegations were found untenable by the two courts. By this

petition, the petitioner has assailed concurrent finding of two courts below.

The petitioner and the respondent both are Advocates and have filed case and

counter case which were found to be false.

I find that there was no reason for this court to interfere with the order

passed by learned ASJ. The petition is hereby dismissed being without merits.

July 15, 2010                            SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA, J.
acm