Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SHANTI SARUP & ANOTHER. versus STATE OF PUNJAB.

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Shanti Sarup & Another. v. State of Punjab. - CRM-17823-M-2005 [2006] RD-P&H 6686 (7 September 2006)

Crl. Misc. No.17823-M of 2005 [1]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH

(1)

Criminal Miscellaneous No.17823-M of 2005 (O & M) Date of Decision : August 30, 2006

Shanti Sarup & Another.

.....PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

State of Punjab.

.....RESPONDENT(S)

. . .

(2)

Criminal Miscellaneous No.42829-M of 2006 Dr. Surinder Kumar Jain & Another.

.....PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

State of Punjab.

.....RESPONDENT(S)

. . .

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA
PRESENT:- Mr. D.D. Bansal and Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocates, for the petitioners.

Mr. Eklavya Kumar, Assistant Advocate

General, Punjab.

Mr. R.S. Bains, Advocate, for respondent No.2.

. . .

AJAI LAMBA, J.

Criminal Miscellaneous No.51682 of 2006 in Criminal Miscellaneous No.17823-M of 2005 is an application under Crl. Misc. No.17823-M of 2005 [2]

Section 482 Cr.P.C. for placing on record the reply on behalf of respondent No.2 (Ram Gopal son of Kishori Lal) alongwith Annexures R-2/1 to R-2/6.

Application is allowed. Document are taken on record.

Criminal Miscellaneous No.17823-M of 2005 and Criminal Miscellaneous No.42829-M of 2006 have been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing FIR No.158 dated 28.6.2004 lodged under Sections 420, 414 and 120-B IPC with Police Station, Malerkotla, District Sangrur.

Notice of motion was issued. Short reply by way of affidavit of Shri Rachhpal Singh, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Malerkotla, District Sangrur, has been filed in Criminal Miscellaneous No.17823-M of 2005. In the reply, it has been pointed out that the investigation has been concluded and cancellation report has been moved.

In the face of such circumstances, these petitions have been rendered infructuous. Dismissed as infructuous.

Learned counsel for respondent No.2/ complainant prays that in view of the cancellation report, the complainant be allowed to file a protest petition or a criminal complaint if the complainant is not satisfied with the cancellation report.

Liberty is granted to the complainant to file a protest petition or criminal complaint as permissible by law.

(AJAI LAMBA)

AUGUST 30, 2006 JUDGE

avin


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.