Petitioner challenged proceedings where prosecution sought to summon an additional accused. Court found no ground for interference as Section 319 CrPC application was pending.
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.
KAPIL 2015.09.18 16:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh.
CRM-M-10190-2015 Date of Decision:15.09.2015
Amarpreet Singh
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and others
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA
Present: None for the petitioner.
Mr. J.S. Sekhon, AAG, Punjab.
SABINA, J.
Learned State counsel who is assisted by Assistant Sub Inspector Harinder Singh, has submitted that after completion of investigation and necessary formalities, challan was presented against respondent No.4. During the pendency of the trial, prosecution moved an application for summoning respondent No.5 as additional accused. The application moved by the prosecution under Section 319 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 was pending.
In view of the submissions made by learned State counsel, no ground for further interference is called for.
Petition stands disposed of, accordingly.
September 15, 2015 kapil
(SABINA) JUDGE
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Amarpreet Singh
State of Punjab
Sabina
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
