NyayAI Legal Knowledge Graph โ€” Public Judgment & Act Pages (validation build, unlisted)

W.P.(CRL)/3030/2017 of ARCHANA SAXENA Vs THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS

Court
Delhi High Court
Decision date
2017-11-01

Parties

Cites (1)

Statutes cited (1)

Full text

solid underline = linked page · dashed underline = case is in our corpus, page not published yet · dotted red = recognized reference, not in our corpus

Show all Header

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+W.P.(CRL) 3030/2017ARCHANA SAXENA..... PetitionerARCHANA SAXENA..... Petitioner

..... Petitioner

ThroughMr. Medhanshu Tripathi with Mr.Sehgal & Ms. Garima Tripathi, Advs.

versus

THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents

ThroughMr. Ashish Negi, Adv. for Ms. RichaKapoor, ASCSI Praveen Kumar, P.S. Mandawali

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMARO R R%01.11.2017

CRL. M.A.17718/2017 (Exemption)

Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions.

Application stands disposed of.

W.P.(CRL) 3030/2017 & Crl.M.A. 17717/2017 (stay)

The petitioner is aggrieved by the notice under Section 63 of theCr.P.C. whereby he has only been communicated that he is required to givereply for the offences under Sections 107/150 of the Cr.P.C. on 06.07.2017.

This court has been informed that next date before the learnedMagistrate is in the month of December.

The notice impugned, though is vague and does not contain thesubstance of information received against the petitioner but the petitioner

has appeared before the Magistrate and has now come to know the substanceof information collected against her.

In that view of the matter, there would be no necessity of interfering

with the notice.

Needless to say that the learned Magistrate while dealing with theissue shall comply with the requirements under Sections 111 and 116 of theCr.P.C. before passing final order.

No order is thus required to be passed in the present writ petition.Dismissed.

ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J

NOVEMBER 01, 2017