Citation : 2011 Latest Caselaw 44 Del
Judgement Date : 4 January, 2011
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Reserve: 15th December, 2010
Date of Order: January 04, 2011
+ Crl. MC No. 2224/2010
% 04.01.2011
Praveen Arora & Anr. ...Petitioner
Versus
Food Inspector & Anr. ...Respondents
Counsels:
Mr. Vikas Arora for petitioners.
Mr. O.P. Saxena, APP for State/respondent.
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 way of present petition, the petitioners have sought quashing of complaint filed
against the petitioner by Food Inspector and the order passed by learned ACMM dated
17th April, 2010 directing framing of notice against the petitioners on the ground that the
petitioners could not be proceeded against in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in
Dwarka Nath v Municipal Corporation of Delhi 1971 Legal Egle 600 and judgment of this
Court in Bharat Arora v State 1999 Legal Eagle 289.
2. The counsel for State agreed that the case of the petitioner was squarely covered
by the judgment of the Supreme Court in Dwarka Nath's case (supra) followed by this
Court in Bharat Arora (supra). He, however, sought time to find out if the above judgment
of Supreme Court has been overruled by a subsequent judgment but he could not
Crl.MC 2224/2010 Page 1 Of 2 produce any subsequent judgment, overruling 'Dwarka Nath's case.
3. In view of above, the petition is allowed and the complaint case against the
petitioners titled as "Food Inspector v Parveen Arora & Anr. and notice dated 17th April,
2010 whereby the notice was framed against the petitioners are hereby quashed.
January 04, 2011 SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA, J rd Crl.MC 2224/2010 Page 2 Of 2
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!