Wednesday, 29, Apr, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Anil Jain vs State & Anr.
2011 Latest Caselaw 5314 Del

Citation : 2011 Latest Caselaw 5314 Del
Judgement Date : 2 November, 2011

Delhi High Court
Anil Jain vs State & Anr. on 2 November, 2011
Author: Suresh Kait
$~9
*   IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+              CRL.M.C. No.2439/2011

        %              Judgment delivered on: 2nd November, 2011

        ANIL JAIN                  ..... Petitioner
                           Through : Mr.Jagdish Prasad Sharma,
                                      Adv.
                      Versus

        STATE & ANR.                     ..... Respondent
                            Through : Mr. Vikram Nandrajog, Adv.
                                      for R-2/NDPL
                                      Ms. Rajdipa Behura, APP
                                      S.I. Alok Bajpai, PS SP Badli.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT

     1. Whether the Reporters of local papers
        may be allowed to see the judgment?                   NO
     2. To be referred to Reporter or not?                    NO
     3. Whether the judgment should be reported
        in the Digest?                                        NO

SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)

CRL.M.C. 2439/2011

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that FIR

No.429/1999 dated 10.6.1999 under Section 39 and 44 of

Indian Electricity Act, 1910, read with Section 379 of Indian

Penal Code, 1860 was registered at Police Station Badli

against the petitioner on the complaint of respondent No.2.

2. Further submits, the entire dues have been paid to

respondent No.2 and thereafter the matter has been

compromised between the parties. The respondent No.2 has

no objection if the present FIR is quashed.

3. Mr. Vikram Nandrajog, learned counsel for the

respondent No.2 has verified from his client that the total

payment has been received. He has no objection if the

present FIR is quashed since his client has resolved all the

disputes for the said FIR.

4. Keeping the statement of counsel for the respondent

No.2 in view, the Criminal M.C. No.2439/2011 is allowed. The

FIR and the proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.

CRL.M.A. 8815/2011

1. The stay application is infructuous.

2. Dasti.

SURESH KAIT, J

November 2, 2011 S.pal

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter