Partly allowed

Gurbax Singh v. State of Punjab and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC30 Aug 2012CRM-M/15301/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed an application under Section 482 CrPC alleging inaction by respondent authorities. The court allowed the application initially, but upon being advised that the alternative remedy had not been availed as mandated by Sakiri Vasu, the court dismissed the petition as withdrawn while granting liberty to approach the appropriate authority under Chapter XII CrPC.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed subject to exceptions; subsequently dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to approach the concerned authority under Chapter XII CrPC.

Gurbax Singh Vs State of Punjab and Others — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Criminal Misc. No. M-15301 of 2012 (O&M) Date of Decision: 30.8.2012

Gurbax Singh

.....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and others

¶7

.....Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK

¶9

Present: Mr. L.S.Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶10

¶11

RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK J.(ORAL)

¶12

Crl. Misc. No. 48695 of 2012

¶13

Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions.

¶14

Annexures P-3 to P-5 are taken on record.

¶15

Crl. Misc. application stands disposed of.

¶16

Crl. Misc. no. M-15301 of 2012

¶17

Feeling aggrieved against the alleged inaction on the part of respondent authorities, petitioner has approached this Court by way of instant petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, invoking its inherent jurisdiction for appropriate directions to the official respondents.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the very outset, fairly states that petitioner has got the alternative remedy, which has not been availed by the petitioner so far.

¶19

During the course of hearing, when confronted with the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sakiri Vasu versus State of U.P. and another, (2008) 2 SCC 409 , learned counsel for the

¶20

¶21

Criminal Misc. No. M-15301 of 2012

¶22

petitioner very fairly states that this petition may be dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to avail the alternative remedy in terms of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sakiri Vasu's case (supra).

¶23

In view of the above statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and without prejudice to the rights of the parties, the instant petition is ordered to be dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty as prayed for.

¶24

However, lest this order is misunderstood, it is made clear that as and when the petitioner moves an appropriate petition before the concerned authority under chapter XII of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The same shall be considered dispassionately and expeditiously, in accordance with law.

¶25

With the observations made above, the petition stands disposed of.

¶26

(RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK) JUDGE

¶27

30.8.2012 AK Sharma

Gurbax Singh v. State of Punjab and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gurbax Singh v. State of Punjab and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sharanjit Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Anirut Vs State of Haryana and Anr.

Anirut Vs State of Haryana & Anr.

Sukhchain Singh @ Chaina Vs State of Punjab

Manish Gupta and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Anr.

Salaam Din Vs State of Punjab and Anr.