Dismissed

Amaninderjit Singh v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC1 Apr 2013CRM-M/10222/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court dismissed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of an FIR. The court held that the petitioner, who absconded and was declared a proclaimed offender without court permission, had no right to invoke this jurisdiction, dismissing the plea that co-accused were acquitted.

What did the court decide?

The petition for quashing of the FIR and the impugned order declaring the petitioner as a proclaimed offender was dismissed.

Amaninderjit Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

-1-

¶2

Crl.M.No.M-10222 of 2013(O&M)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶4

Crl.M.No.M-10222 of 2013(O&M) Date of Decision: April 1, 2013

Amaninderjit Singh

.....Petitioner

State of Punjab and another

¶9

......Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA

¶11

Present: Mr.Baljinder Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

.....

¶13

RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral)

¶14

The present petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is for quashing of FIR No.243, dated 9.11.2006, under Sections 379, 447, 448 and 34 IPC, registered at Police Station Sadar, Nawanshahar, and order dated 8.3.2010, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, SBS Nagar (Nawanshahar), vide which present petitioner was declared proclaimed offender.

¶15

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the whole record carefully.

¶16

Briefly stated, petitioner was facing trial before Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, SBS Nagar. He was on bail. However, he absented from the Court and went abroad without any permission of the Court. He was declared proclaimed offender vide order 8.3.2010, Annexure P1 and since then he is absconding.

¶17

It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioneraccused that petitioner went abroad for getting the treatment of his wife and that now he is ready to surrender. It is further contended that on the same set of allegations, co-accused have already been acquitted by learned trial Court vide judgment Annexure P2.

¶18

However, petitioner did not face trial in this case. Rather he absconded and was declared proclaimed offender. He went abroad without

¶19

-2-

¶20

Crl.M.No.M-10222 of 2013(O&M)

¶21

permission of the Court. Hence, he is having no right to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for getting the FIR quashed on the plea that co-accused already acquitted, who faced trial.

¶22

Hence, in view of these facts, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition filed by petitionerAmaninderjit Singh for quashing of FIR is, hereby, dismissed being devoid of any merit.

¶23

1.4.2013 meenu

¶24

(Ram Chand Gupta) Judge

Amaninderjit Singh v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amaninderjit Singh v. State of Punjab and Anr.

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

Amandeep Kaur and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Harpreet Kaur and Another Vs State of Punjab and Others

Kamalpreet Kaur and Others Vs State of Punjab and Others

Geeta Mahant Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Kuljinder Kaur and Another Vs State of Punjab and Others

Chinder Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.