Dismissed

Suresh v. State of Haryana and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC25 Mar 2013CRM-M/27825/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a criminal miscellaneous petition filed by an accused challenging the addition of Section 307 IPC charges. The petitioner argued the charge was based on a private doctor's opinion, which the court found incorrect; the records showed the opinion came from a Government Medical Officer, rendering the petition misconceived and meritless.

What did the court decide?

The instant petition is dismissed being misconceived and meritless.

Suresh Vs State of Haryana and Others — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

Crl.Misc. No.M-27825 of 2012 (O&M)

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH

¶4

Crl.Misc. No.M-27825 of 2012 (O&M) Date of Decision: 25.03.2013

Suresh

..... PETITIONER

VERSUS

State of Haryana and another

¶9

..... RESPONDENTS

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L N MITTAL

¶11

PRESENT: - Ms.Davinder Kaur, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr.S.S.Pattar, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana.

¶13

. . .

¶14

L N MITTAL, J (Oral)

¶15

Accused Suresh has filed this petition under Section 482

¶16

of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'Cr.P.C.').

¶17

FIR No.137 dated 01.05.2012, under Sections 148,149,323,325,287,452,506,307 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') has been registered at Police Station Sadar, Palwal against the petitioner and others (Annexure P-1). Offence under Section 307 IPC was added later on in the case.

¶18

The grievance of the petitioner in the instant petition is

¶19

Crl.Misc. No.M-27825 of 2012 (O&M) 2

¶20

that offence under Section 307 IPC was added on the basis of opinion of a private doctor declaring the injury of Attar Singh injured to be dangerous to life. Accordingly, the petitioner prayed that the official respondents be directed to get the injured Attar Singh examined by Board of Doctors to find out if offence under Section 307 IPC has been rightly added or not.

¶21

The respondents in their reply have alleged that offence under Section 307 IPC has been added on the basis of opinion dated 21.05.2012 given by the Government Medical Officer from Government Hospital, Palwal and not on the basis of opinion of the private doctor.

¶22

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file.

¶23

The petitioner has relied on document Annexure P-2 whereby offence under Section 307 IPC was added in the case. However, perusal of the said document reveals that there was x-ray report from a private hospital regarding fracture suffered by Attar Singh but this document does not state that opinion regarding injuries No.1 and 2 of Attar Singh being dangerous to life giving rise to offence under Section 307 IPC, was given by a private doctor. The document is silent as to whether said opinion was given by private doctor or Government Medical Officer. However, in reply by the respondents, it has been specifically stated that the aforesaid opinion was given by the Government Medical Officer. A photostat copy of the said opinion from police file has also been shown to this Court.

¶24

In view of the aforesaid, the very basis for filing this petition is missing. The petition has been filed on incorrect factual position

¶25

Crl.Misc. No.M-27825 of 2012 (O&M) 3

¶26

that the aforesaid opinion was obtained from private doctor whereas infact the same was given by the Government Medical Officer.

¶27

In view of the aforesaid, without meaning to express anything on merits, the instant petition is dismissed being misconceived and

¶28

meritless.

¶29

( L N MITTAL ) March 25, 2013 Judge

¶30

Suresh v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh v. State of Haryana and Others

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

Bachittar Singh Vs State of Punjab

Lila Singh Fauji and Ors. Vs State of Punjab

Jaswant Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Narinder Singh Vs State of Punjab

Pavitter Singh Vs State of Punjab

Balram & Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.