Disposed

Surjit Kaur @ Manjinder Kaur @Seeto v. State of Punjab and Another

Punjab & Haryana HC30 Jan 2019CRM-M/2058/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court recalled an order imposing costs of Rs. 15,000, preponed the hearing of the main petition, and quashed the order dated 30.03.2016. It ordered the petitioner to appear before the trial court and directed that her bail application be decided within 7 days.

What did the court decide?

Recall of cost order; quashing of conviction order; direction to trial court to decide bail within 7 days.

Surjit Kaur @ Manjinder Kaur @Seeto Vs State of… — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2019)

¶1

CRM-M-2058-2019 (O&M)

¶2

--1--

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM-M-2058-2019 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION:-30.01.2019

¶5

SURJIT KAUR @ MANJINDER KAUR @ SEETO

¶6

...PETITIONER...

¶7

¶8

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR.

¶9

...RESPONDENTS...

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN

¶11

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

¶12

¶13

RAMENDRA JAIN, J. (ORAL)

¶14

CRM-3354-2019

¶15

Prayer in this application is for modification/clarification of order dated 18.01.2019, whereby costs to the tune of Rs.15,000/- has been imposed.

¶16

Heard.

¶17

For the reasons mentioned in the application, same is allowed and order dated 18.01.2019 qua deposit of cost to the tune of Rs.15,000/- is recalled.

¶18

At the oral request of learned counsel for the petitioner, the hearing of the main petition, which is fixed for 25.03.2019, is preponed for today i.e. 30.01.2019.

¶19

CRM-M-2058-2019

¶20

Prayer in this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been

¶21

SONIKA 2019.01.31 12:59 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶22

CRM-M-2058-2019 (O&M)

¶23

--2--

¶24

made for quashing order dated 30.03.2016, in case, FIR No.261 dated 11.06.2004, under Sections 406, 420 and 34 IPC, Police Station Division-8, District Jalandhar.

¶25

The petitioner is directed to appear before the trial court within 7 days with liberty to raise all the pleas, which have been raised in the instant petition with further direction to trial court that her bail application, if any, shall be decided within next 7 days.

¶26

In case of non-compliance of this order, an adverse inference of every type would be drawn against the petitioner.

¶27

Copy of this order be sent to trial court for information and necessary action.

¶28

Disposed of.

¶29

30.01.2019 (RAMENDRA JAIN) sonika JUDGE whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No whether reportable: Yes/No

¶30

SONIKA 2019.01.31 12:59 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Surjit Kaur @ Manjinder Kaur @Seeto v. State of Punjab and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surjit Kaur @ Manjinder Kaur @Seeto v. State of Punjab and Another

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

Bano(Now Confined in Model Jail,Chandigarh) Vs State of U.T.,Chandigarh

Nand Kishore and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Others

Bhagwan Singh @ Bara Vs State of Punjab

Gopal Singh Vs State of Punjab and Another

Sahanwaj and Another Vs State of Haryana

Ravinder Singh @ Hatar Vs State of Punjab