High CourtsDivision Bench

Surinder Kumar Bindal vs State and Another

Delhi High Court · Decided on 14 May 2003 · Citation: (2003) 3 CCR 92 : (2003) 105 DLT 58 : (2003) 69 DRJ 368 : (2003) 2 JCC 1163 : (2004) 4 RCR(Criminal) 15

HON’BLE JUDGES
Usha Mehra, J · Pradeep Nandrajog, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226 · Electricity Act, 1910 — Section 39, 44 · Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 379
CASE NUMBER
Criminal W. No. 1384 of 2002
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

2 paragraphs · 135 words
1.

Mr. Krishan Kumar, Counsel for the petitioner says that the petitioner has already deposited the bill amount in the office of the respondent No. 2 and endorsement of the same is given on the receipt itself. Since the full amount has been paid, the respondents are also not interested in pursuing the criminal litigation. In this view of the matter, the FIR lodged against the petitioner bearing No. 110/99 u/s 39/44 of the Indian Electricity Act r/w Section 379, IPC at Police Station Samay Pur Badli is ordered to be quashed. Any proceedings initiated thereon pursuant to the FIR No. 110/99 u/s 39/44, Electricity Act and 379, IPC of P.S. Samay Pur Badli in the Court of the Metropolitan Magistrate are ordered to be dropped. Order accordingly.

2.

The petition stands disposed of. dusty.