Petitioner sought directions to complete investigation. State submitted a cancellation report pending presentation, obviating need for court interference. Petition disposed of.
Petition disposed of as no further interference is called for pending presentation of cancellation report.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
Criminal Misc. No.M-12506 of 2010 Date of decision: 16.9.2010
Tej Kaur
......Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and others
.......Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA
Present: Mr.H.S.Sirohi, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr.Amandeep Singh Rai, A.A.G, Punjab.
SABINA, J.
This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with a prayer that directions may kindly be issued to respondents No. 1 to 4 to complete the investigation in FIR No.496 dated 5.7.2008, under Sections 454, 380 of the Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station Kotwali District Bathinda.
Learned State counsel has tendered reply on behalf of respondents No.1 to 4. As per the reply, after investigation, cancellation report has been prepared. Learned State counsel, on instructions from HC Rajinderpal Singh, has submitted that the cancellation report will be presented in the Court within ten days. In
-2-
Criminal Misc. No.M-12506 of 2010
these circumstances, no further interference by this Court is called for as the petitioner will be free to challenge the cancellation report by filing a protest petition, if so advised.
Petition stands disposed of accordingly.
September 16, 2010 anita
(SABINA) JUDGE
1 issue framed by the court
Whether further interference is needed to direct completion of investigation in the FIR.
Tej Kaur
State of Punjab
Sabina
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
