Allowed

Gurjit Singh @ Jeeta v. State of Punjab & Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC13 Oct 2014CRM-M/13309/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana, in a petition under Section 482 CrPC, set aside the direction to arrest the petitioner and the subsequent order declaring him a proclaimed offender, noting the complaint had been withdrawn by the complainant.

What did the court decide?

The direction to arrest and the order declaring the petitioner a proclaimed offender were set aside.

Gurjit Singh @ Jeeta Vs State of Punjab… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

Crl. Misc. No. M-13309 of 2013 (O&M)

¶2

-1 -

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶4

Crl. Misc. No. M-13309 of 2013 (O&M) Date of Decision: 13.10.2014.

Gurjit Singh @ Jeeta

........Petitioner

Vs.

State of Punjab and another

¶9

......Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA

¶11

Present: Mr. Amrinder Vir Singh, Advocate for Mr. Salil Bali, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr. K.S.Aulakh, AAG, Punjab.

¶13

None for respondent No. 2.

¶14

SABINA, J.

¶15

Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 challenging the order dated 10.2.2012 (Annexure P-3).

¶16

Heard.

¶17

In the present case, a perusal of the order dated 19.4.2012 (Annexure P-5) reveals that the complainant had made a statement that in view of the compromise effected between the parties, he did not want to proceed with the complaint. Consequently, the complaint was ordered to be dismissed as withdrawn. A perusal of compromise Annexure P-4 reveals that the parties are closely related to each other.

¶18

Since the complaint in question has already been withdrawn by the complainant, the direction issued by the Trial Court vide order dated 19.4.2012 for arresting the present

¶19

GURPREET SINGH 2014.10.17 10:20 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶20

Crl. Misc. No. M-13309 of 2013 (O&M) -2 -

¶21

petitioner in view of the order whereby he was declared a proclaimed offender, is liable to be set aside. There was no occasion to arrest the petitioner and produce him before the Trial Court as the presence of the petitioner was not necessary in view of the dismissal of the complainant.

¶22

Accordingly, the direction issued by the Trial Court vide order dated 19.4.2012 (Annexure P-5) that petitioner be arrested and produced before the said Court, is set aside. Consequently, the order whereby the petitioner was declared a proclaimed offender, is rendered infrucutous.

¶23

(SABINA) JUDGE

¶24

October 13, 2014 Gurpreet

¶25

GURPREET SINGH 2014.10.17 10:20 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Gurjit Singh @ Jeeta v. State of Punjab & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gurjit Singh @ Jeeta v. State of Punjab & 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

Rajesh Kumar and Anr. Vs State of Punjab

Gursharanjit Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Balwinder Kaur @ Davinder Kaur Vs Karamjit Kaur

Hari Krishan Vs Rajinder Singh

Manjit Singh & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Jagmeet Singh Vs State of Punjab