Petitioner sought quashing of an order dismissing a Section 311 Cr.P.C. application in a Section 279 IPC case. Counsel requested withdrawal, and the petition was dismissed as withdrawn.
The petition was dismissed as withdrawn.
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.
Crl.M.No.M-27263 of 2012(O&M)
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
Crl.M.No.M-27263 of 2012(O&M) Date of Decision: December 10, 2012
Sandesh Kumar
.....Petitioner
v.
Tarlok Singh
.....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA
Present: Mrs.Anju Arora Advocate for the petitioner.
.....
RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral)
The present petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is for quashing of order dated 17.8.2012 passed by learned trial Court vide which application of petitioner filed under Section 311 Cr.P.C. was dismissed.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the whole record carefully, including the impugned order and the zimni orders passed by learned learned trial Court.
Briefly stated, complaint for offence under Section 279 IPC was filed by the present petitioner against respondent. After recording preliminary evidence, respondent-accused was ordered to be summoned for offence under Section 279 IPC by learned trial Court vide order dated 14.6.2007. Respondent-accused appeared before learned trial Court on 15.6.2009 and was admitted to bail as the offence being bailable one. Thereafter case was adjourned for several times for recording evidence of the petitioner. As many as 18 opportunities including last opportunity were given by learned trial Court and thereafter evidence of the prosecution was closed vide order dated 1.8.2011, Annexure P3. However, after closing evidence of the complainant, an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. was filed by the petitioner, which was also dismissed vide impugned order dated 17.8.2012, Annexure P2.
However, after arguing for some time, learned counsel for the
Crl.M.No.M-27263 of 2012(O&M)
-2-
petitioner requests for withdrawal of this petition.
Dismissed as withdrawn.
10.12.2012 (Ram Chand Gupta) meenu Judge
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Sandesh Kumar
Tarlok Singh
Ram Chand Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
