Petitioner sought directions under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to conclude investigation in a POCSO and IPC case. The Court held the petition rendered infructuous as a cancellation report was filed with notice to the petitioner. It was dismissed accordingly.
Petition dismissed as infructuous due to cancellation report filed against the accused.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-2428 of 2018 Date of Decision: 27.02.2019
Dilshad Ahmed
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and others
....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN
Present:Mr. G.S. Sandhu, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Harpreet Multani, AAG, Punjab.
RAMENDRA JAIN, J. (ORAL)
Through instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. prayer has been made for issuance of direction to respondents No.2 and 3 to fairly conclude investigation in case FIR No.85 dated 10.08.2017 registered under Sections 377, 506 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, Act, 2012 at Police Station City-1, Malerkotla.
Learned State counsel, on instructions from SI Harmeet Singh, submits that instant petition has rendered infructuous in view of the fact that cancellation report has been filed in the aforesaid FIR with advance notice to the petitioner-complainant for 30.03.2019.
Dismissed as having been rendered infructuous.
(RAMENDRA JAIN) February 27, 2019 JUDGE R.S. Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No
RAVINDER SINGH 2019.03.02 13:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. rendered infructuous due to the cancellation report filed against the registrar-accused.
Whether a direction to conclude investigation in case FIR No.85 should be issued to the respondents.
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Dilshad Ahmed
State of Punjab
Ramendra Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
