Disposed

Harpreet Kaur and Anr. v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC10 May 2010CRM-M/13481/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal miscellaneous petition, the High Court refused to quash the FIR against the petitioners but granted an exemption from personal appearance in court, allowing witness examination in the presence of their counsel.

What did the court decide?

Exemption from personal appearance before the trial court; witness examination to be conducted in the presence of counsel under Section 273 Cr.P.C.

Harpreet Kaur and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2010)

¶1

Crl. Misc. No.M-13481 of 2010 [1]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

¶3

CHANDIGARH.

¶4

Crl. Misc. No. M-13481 of 2010

¶5

Date of Decision: May 10, 2010

¶6

Harpreet Kaur and another

¶7

…..Petitioners

¶8

Vs.

¶9

State of Punjab and another

¶10

…..Respondents

¶11

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI.

¶12

-.-

¶13

Present:Mr. O.S. Batalvi, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶14

-.-

¶15

M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL)

¶16

Petitioners seek quashing of criminal proceedings against them which were initiated in the year 2002 with the lodging of FIR No. 94 dated October 28, 2002 under Sections 406, 420, 498A IPC Police Station Division No.4, Jalandhar.

¶17

Counsel for the petitioners claims that the petitioners are married sisters-in-law of complainant- respondent No.2. They were not initially challaned but they were subsequently summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C. They have also been facing trial for the last three years.

¶18

Crl. Misc. No.M-13481 of 2010 [2]

¶19

After hearing counsel for the petitioners, I am of the opinion

¶20

that the petition for quashing of FIR qua the petitioners cannot be entertained at this stage as the petitioners had neither challenged the order under Section 319 Cr.P.C. nor challenged the presentation of supplementary challan. They had not challenged the framing of charges against them at an opportune time. It will not be expedient in the interest of justice at this belated stage to exercise inherent jurisdiction by observing that continuation of proceedings against the petitioners is an abuse of the process of the Court. Only relief which can be granted to the petitioners being married ladies, is that their personal appearance before the trial Court can be exempted subject to any directions passed by the trial Court.

¶21

It has been informed that only three witnesses have been examined though the criminal prosecution was launched in the year 2002.

¶22

Without expression of any opinion on merits of the case against the petitioners at this stage, the petition is disposed of with a direction that in case the petitioners move an application for exemption from personal appearance, it would be allowed by the trial Court subject to any reasonable condition imposed upon the petitioners. It is also made clear that the examination of witnesses can be conducted in presence of counsel for the petitioners as per provisions of Section 273 Cr.P.C. In case the petitioners do not comply with any direction of the trial Court, it will be open to the trial Court to take action in accordance with law irrespective of the present order granting relief of exemption to the petitioners.

¶23

Crl. Misc. No.M-13481 of 2010 [3]

¶24

May 10, 2010 (M.M.S.BEDI) sanjay JUDGE

Harpreet Kaur and Anr. v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harpreet Kaur and Anr. v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Case details

Similar cases

Chand Kaur Vs General Public & Anr.

Parminder Kaur Vs State of Punjab

Jagtar Singh Vs Veerpal Kaur

Kuldip Singh Vs State of Punjab & Others

Jasbir Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Vazeer Singh Vs State of Punjab