The High Court disposed of a petition seeking quashing of an FIR under the inherent jurisdiction of Cr.P.C. Section 482 as infructuous, based on the admission by counsel that a cancellation report had been prepared by the police.
The petition was disposed of as having been rendered infructuous.
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.
1
Criminal Misc.M-No.17017 of 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc.M-No.17017 of 2012 Date of Decision:29.08.2012
Anirut
.....petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana & anr.
.....respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK
Present: Mr.S.P.Chahar, Advocate for the petitioner
Mr.Kshitij Sharma, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana Mr.Naveen Daryal, Advocate for respondent No.2
RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK J.(ORAL):
Feeling aggrieved against the alleged false implication, the petitioner has approached this Court, under Section 482 Cr.P.C., invoking its inherent jurisdiction, for quashing of FIR No.71 dated 10.04.2012, under Sections 366, 376, 506, 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Madhuban, District Karnal.
Notice of motion was issued and pursuant thereto reply by way of affidavit dated 21.08.2012 of Joginder Singh Rathi, Deputy Superintendent of Police (City), Karnal, has been filed on behalf of the State.
Learned State counsel, on instructions from SI Parkash Chand, Police Station Madhuban, District Karnal, submits that the cancellation report has since been prepared in the present case, which is likely to be presented to the learned court of competent jurisdiction, the instant petition has become infructuous and may be disposed of as such.
Faced with the above said situation, learned counsel for the
Criminal Misc.M-No.17017 of 2012
2
petitioner fairly states that in view of the reply filed and statement made by learned State counsel, the present petition does not survive and the same may be disposed of as having been rendered infructous.
In view of the above statements made by learned counsel for the parties, the instant petition is ordered to be disposed of as having been rendered infructous.
(RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK) JUDGE
29.08.2012 neenu
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petition for quashing the FIR is maintainable given the information provided by the police.
Whether the petition should be disposed of as infructuous.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Anirut
State of Haryana
RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
