Disposed

Amandeep Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Another

Punjab & Haryana HC7 Dec 2023CRM-M/28840/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Punjab and Haryana High Court disposed of a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing an FIR related to criminal conspiracy in a police examination matter. Conceding the petitioners' age and career constraints, the Court directed the trial court to conclude the trial within six months and imposed penalties for delays.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the trial court to conclude the trial within six months; penalty clause for repeated adjournments by the petitioners.

Amandeep Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and… — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2023)

¶1

2023:PHHC:156221

¶2

113 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

CRM-M-28840-2023

¶4

Date of Decision: 07.12.2023

¶5

Amandeep Singh and others

¶6

...Pe""oners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Punjab and another

¶9

…Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

¶11

Present: Mr. Ashish Pal Kaushal, Advocate for the pe""oners.

¶12

Ms. Swa" Batra, D.A.G., Punjab (through V.C.).

¶13

¶14

ANOOP CHITKARA, J. (ORAL)

¶15

FIR No.	Dated	Police Sta"on	Sec"ons
04	06.04.2016	Vigilance Bureau,	409, 420, 120-B IPC and 13
		Phase-1 Mohali	(2)of PC Act,1988

¶16

Seeking quashing of FIR cap"oned above, the pe""oners have come up before this Court by filing the present pe""on under Sec"on 482 Cr.P.C.

¶17

A;er arguing this case for some "me, counsel for the pe""oners submits that his alterna"ve prayer is that in case the trial is expedited and concluded within a "me bound manner, he would not press the main relief. It is for the reasons that there is no evidence regarding the means vide which the alleged answer sheet was supplied, he was selected on merits but was not appointed on job. He further submits that some of the pe""oners are unable to apply for other government jobs due to pendency of this FIR, and they are going to over age for majority of jobs and the speed with which the trial is going on, they would never get a government job.

¶18

Considering the age of the pe""oners which range maximum 30 to 38, the prayer is genuine and is accepted.

¶19

Given the nature of order which this Court proposes to pass, no response is required from the State or any other respondent.

¶20

Given above, present pe""on is disposed of with a direc"on to the trial Court to make every effort to conclude the trial within 06 months from today. Pe""oners are directed not to seek any adjournment before the trial Court. In case, the pe""oners seek adjournment and the "me for which the ma@er is delayed because of the pe""oner shall be added in the s"pulated "me period of six months. If the pe""oner seeks repeated adjournments, this order shall stand re-called under Sec"on 362 read with Sec"on 482 Cr.P.C. without reference to this Court. Counsel for the pe""oners to supply copy of this order to the trial Court.

¶21

All pending applica"ons, if any also stands disposed of.

¶22

(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE

¶23

07.12.2023 Jyo" Sharma Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: No.

¶24

Jyoti Sharma 2023.12.08 13:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Sector 1, High Court, Chandigarh

¶25

Amandeep Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amandeep Singh and Ors. 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

Neeraj Vs State of Haryana

Charanjit Singh@Channi Vs State of Punjab

Shubham Vs State of Ut Chandigarh

Sandeep Singh Vs State of Punjab

Deepak Kumar Vs State of Punjab

Anil Vij Vs State of Punjab