Julie (Minor) Through Father Shri Santosh Kumar v. Amit Kumar @ Mohan and Anothers

ORDER o/o

12.10.2009

¶1The prosecutrix, through her father has filed the instant Revision Petition for the reason, by the time the Revision Petition was filed, the State had not made up its mind whether the state would be challenging the decision whereby the respondent has been acquitted.

¶2The State has since filed Crl.L.P. No.38/09 seeking leave to appeal against the impugned decision of acquittal.

¶3ln that view of the matter, we decline to entertain the instant Revision Petition but grant liberty to the revisionist to Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. :2:- assist the learned Public Prosecutor in prosecution of Crl.L.P. No.38/09 and the appeal, should leave to appeal be granted.

¶4The Revision Petition stands disposed of as aforesaid. -T-6,.--s.--}e/U( PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J suREsH KAtr, J ocroBER 1 2, 2009 'nks' ,\

i\ t_ r.55 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL. REV. P. 658/2008 JULrE (MTNOR) THROUGH FATHER SHRI SANTOSH KUMAR ..... PetitioneT Through : Mr.Piyush Singh for Mr. Vikas Pahwa, Addl. Standing Counsel. VCTSUS !. AMlr KUMAR @ MOHAN & ANR. ..... Respondent Through : None CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTTCE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTTCE SURESH KAtr