Allowed

Nirvair Singh v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC16 Nov 2015CRM-M/22369/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In matters CRM-M-22369 of 2015, the High Court permitted an application to implead a complainant. It also directed the Inspector General of Police to decide a pending representation by the petitioner within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to IMP to consider and decide the representation within six weeks; impleadment of complainant and amended memo permitted.

Nirvair Singh Vs State of Punjab & Ors. — Contempt of Court | Punjab & Haryana HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

CRM-M-22369 of 2015 Date of Decision: 16.11.2015

Nirvair Singh

.....Petitioner

Vs.

State of Punjab and others

¶7

.....Respondents

¶8

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK

¶9

Present : Mr. Ritesh Pandey, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶10

¶11

RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK J. (ORAL)

¶12

CRM Nos. 33953 and 33954 of 2015

¶13

Applicant-petitioner seeks to implead the complainant-Ms. Gurpinder Kaur as party-respondent No.5 and also seeks permission to place on record amended memo of parties.

¶14

After hearing learned counsel for the applicant, both these applications are allowed, for the reasons stated therein. Amended memo of parties is also permitted to be taken on record.

¶15

CRMs stand disposed of.

¶16

CRM-M-22369 of 2015

¶17

Feeling aggrieved against the alleged inaction on the part of the respondent authorities, petitioner has approached this Court by way of instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking appropriate direction. AMIT KUMAR

¶18

AMIT KUMAR 2015.11.16 18:20 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶19

CRM-M- 22369 of 2015

¶20

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that when the grievance of the petitioner was not being redressed by the respondent authorities, he finally approached the Inspector General of Police, Border Range, Amritsar-respondent No.2 by way of self contained representation Annexure P-3, which is claimed to be dated 27.6.2015, but the same is also pending decision. He further submits that the petitioner will be satisfied in case the Inspector General of Police, Border Range, Amritsar-respondent No.2 is directed to consider and decide his representation, within a reasonable time.

¶22

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, lest it should prejudice the rights of either of the parties, the Inspector General of Police, Border Range, Amritsar-respondent No.2 is directed to look into the matter, consider the grievance of the petitioner, raised vide his representation Annexure P-3 and decide the same, at an early date by passing an appropriate order thereon, strictly in accordance with law, but in any case within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶23

With the abovesaid observations made and directions issued, present petition stands disposed of.

¶24

(RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK) JUDGE

¶25

16.11.2015 Ak Sharma

¶26

AMIT KUMAR 2015.11.16 18:20 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

Nirvair Singh v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nirvair Singh v. State of Punjab & Ors.

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

Pawan Kumar Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Gurlal & Ors. Vs State of Haryana & Anr.

Rajinder Kumar and Ors. Vs Ut of Chandigarh

Nar Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Hardip Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Kailash Chander and Ors. Vs State of Punjab