Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

PARVESH KUMAR & ANR. versus STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Parvesh Kumar & Anr. v. State of Punjab & Anr. - CRM-18921-m-2004 [2006] RD-P&H 3000 (8 May 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Crl. Misc. No.18921-M of 2004

Date of decision: May 17, 2006.

Parvesh Kumar & Anr.

...Petitioner(s)

v.

State of Punjab & Anr.

...Respondent(s)

Present: Shri Sandeep Arora, Advocate for the petitioners.

Shri B.S. Sewak, Dy. Advocate General, Punjab.

Surya Kant, J. (Oral)

The prayer in this petition is for quashing of FIR No.57 dated 11.3.2004, under section 406, 498-A 506 IPC, registered at Police Station Division No.6 Jalandhar and the proceedings arising therefrom.

The aforementioned FIR has been got registered by respondent No.2 ,whose daughter Usha Rani @ Varsha was married to Pawan Kumar on 8.12.2002. The petitioners are younger brother and sister, respectively, of the said Pawan Kumar.

Notice of motion was issued and in response thereto reply has been filed on behalf of respondent No.1 by way of affidavit of Charanjit Singh, DSP, City-II, Jalandhar.

After hearing Learned Counsel for the parties and going through the material on record including the reply filed by the prosecution, though, it does not appear expedient and/or desirable to quash the impugned proceedings, however, having regard to the fact that the petitioners are unmarried brother and sister of the main accused, this petition is disposed of with the following directions:-

(i) The petitioners will be at liberty to raise all the pleas at an appropriate stage and the same shall be considered in accordance with law;

(ii) if the petitioners so desire, they may move an application to grant them exemption from personal appearance subject to the condition that:- (i) will be represented through counsel; (ii) will not delay/stall the trial proceedings; (iii) will not dispute their identity as accused; and (iv) will have no objection if the prosecution evidence is also recorded in their absence but in the presence of their counsel; (iii) if any such application is moved by the petitioner, the learned trial court is directed to grant them exemption from personal appearance subject, however, to any such other conditions which it may like to impose upon them.

Disposed of.

May 17, 2006. [ Surya Kant ]

kadyan Judge


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.