Disposed

Birender and Ors. v. Birham Parkash Yadav and Another

Punjab & Haryana HC26 Oct 2010CRM-M/15425/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal miscellaneous petition challenging an FIR and summoning order on grounds of violation of Section 210 Cr.PC due to divergent police reports was disposed of as not pressed. The court granted liberty to the petitioners to seek appropriate relief from the trial court under the relevant provision.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of as not pressed; liberty granted to petitioners to make application under Section 210 Cr.PC for appropriate remedy.

Birender and Ors. Vs Birham Parkash… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Punjab & Haryana HC (2010)

¶1

Crl. Misc.No.M 15425 of 2010(O&M) #1#

¶2

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

¶3

Crl. Misc.No.M 15425 of 2010(O&M)

¶4

Date of Decision:-26.10.2010

¶5

Birender & Ors.

¶6

......Petitioners .

¶7

Versus

¶8

Birham Parkash & Anr .

¶9

. ...... Respondents

¶10

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH .

¶11

Present:Mr. Jai Veer Yadav, Advocate for the Petitioners.

¶12

Mr. Vinod S. Bhardwaj, Advocate for the respondent no.1-Complainant.

¶13

Mr. M.S. Sindhu, Additional Advocate General, Haryana for respondent no.2.

¶14

¶15

JASWANT SINGH, J(ORAL)

¶16

Present petition under Section 482 Cr.PC is for quashing of complaint bearing no.22 dated 24.2.2010 pending in the court of ACJM, Rewari and the summoning order dated 22.2.2010 whereby the petitioners-accused have been summoned to face trial for offences under sections 148, 149, 323, 325, 307, 452, 506 and 34 of Indian Penal Code.

¶17

The contention raised by the petitioners was that besides

¶18

#2#

¶19

Crl. Misc.No.M 15425 of 2010(O&M)

¶20

the registration of the FIR at the instance of the complainantrespondent no.1, a private complaint has also been filed by the complainant with respect to the same occurrence and they have been summoned without taking into consideration the mandate of Section 210 Cr.PC.

¶21

During the course of hearing it was noticed that there were two divergent reports by two different DSPs with regard to the alleged occurrence and, therefore, Inspector General of Police, South Range, Haryana had directed a fresh inquiry to be conducted by the officer of the rank of SP.

¶22

At the time of hearing today learned State Counsel has filed a status report by Sh. K. Venkata Ramana, Superintendent of Police, Rewari. In the report it has been stated that after investigations, it has been found that the offence under Section 307 of Indian Penal Code is not made out and accordingly the SHO concerned has been directed to complete the investigations.

¶23

At this stage learned counsel for the petitioners submits that he does not wish to press this petition for quashing of the complaint, however, liberty be given to the petitioners to make an appropriate application under Section 210 Cr.PC seeking appropriate directions.

¶24

Learned State Counsel and counsel for the complainant, do not have any objection to the same.

¶25

In view of the agreed stand the present petition is disposed of as not pressed with the liberty to the petitioners-accused to make appropriate application, if so, advised under Section 210 Cr.PC for

¶26

Crl. Misc.No.M 15425 of 2010(O&M) #3#

¶27

seeking appropriate remedy before the trial court.

¶28

Disposed of in the above terms.

¶29

( JASWANT SINGH ) JUDGE

¶30

26^th October, 2010 Vinay

Birender and Ors. v. Birham Parkash Yadav and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Birender and Ors. v. Birham Parkash Yadav and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tara Singh Vs State of Punjab & Anr.

Bhag Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab & Others

Sukhwinder Singh & Others Vs State of Punjab & Others

Brij Mohan Vs Sohan Singh

Ram Kalan & Ors. Vs Birham Parkash Yadav and Anr.

Charanjit Singh @ Tinku @ Billa Vs State of Punjab