Satpal v. State of Haryana and Anr.
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court of Punjab & Haryana refused to quash a criminal complaint under Section 482 Cr.P.C. because the trial had virtually concluded, rendering the petition inappropriate for interference.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
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 & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH
Criminal Miscellaneous No. M-2615 of 2011 Date of Decision: November 22, 2011
Satpal
.....PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
State of Haryana & another
.....RESPONDENT(S)
. . .
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA
PRESENT: - Mr. B.S. Dhillon, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Sukhvinder Singh Nara, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. Vivek Goel, Advocate, for respondent No.2.
. . .
AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral)
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether this Court should quash criminal complaint No.292 of 2005 under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Whether interference under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is appropriate when the trial is virtually concluded
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Satpal
- respondent
State of Haryana
Coram
AJAI LAMBA
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Punjab & Haryana HC
- Decided on
- · November
- Registered
- Case no.
- CRM-M/2615/2011
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court