Dismissed

Manjit Singh Sethi v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC28 Nov 2023CRM-M/49041/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court heard a petition to quash an FIR under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The petitioner alleged inaction against a bureaucrat accused of taking a bribe, arguing he could not be an accused. State counsel assured completion of investigation within three months. The petition was withdrawn on the spot.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of as withdrawn; all pending applications disposed of.

Manjit Singh Sethi Vs State of Punjab — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2023)

¶1

2023:PHHC:150567

¶2

CRM-M-49041-2023 (O&M)

¶3

108

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶5

CRM-M-49041-2023 (O&M) Date of Decision: 28.11.2023

Manjit Singh Sethi

-Pe""oner

Versus

State of Punjab

-Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

¶12

Present: Mr. R.S. Rai, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. Anurag Arora, Advocate and Ms. Radhika Mehta, Advocate for the pe""oner.

¶13

Mr. Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, Addl. A.G., Punjab.

¶14

¶15

ANOOP CHITKARA, J. (ORAL)

¶16

FIR No.	Dated	Police Sta"	on	Sec"ons
9	28.07.2022	Economic f	Offences	7, 7-A, 8, 12, 13 (2) of PC Act,
		Wing,	Punjab	1988 and 409, 420, 467, 468,
		Vigilance Ludhiana	Bureau,	471, 120-B IPC

¶17

The primary ground for the pe""oner to approach this Court for quashing of FIR under Sec"on 482 Cr.P.C. is that although there is an allega"on of payment of bribe against the pe""oner of Rs.50 lacs to Raman Bala Subramanium, an IAS officer, however, the State is not taking any ac"on against him and he is not arrayed as accused "ll date, as such the pe""oner can also not be an accused.

¶18

On the contrary, State counsel on instruc"ons from DSP Inderpal Singh submits that they would complete the inves"ga"on qua the pe""oner within one month and on a ques"on from this Court that how much "me it would take to complete the en"re inves"ga"on, the State counsel submits that they would make full endeavour to complete the inves"ga"on within 03 months.

¶19

Counsel for the pe""oner submits that the State is trying to protect the bureaucrat Raman Bala Subramanium, however, State counsel submits that Raman Bala Subramanium, IAS Officer is also an accused in the present FIR.

¶20

�

¶21

Jyoti Sharma 2023.11.29 14:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Sector 1, High Court, Chandigarh

¶22

2023:PHHC:150567

¶23

CRM-M-49041-2023 (O&M)

¶24

Given above, counsel for the pe""oner wishes to withdraw the present pe""on with liberty to file fresh at an appropriate stage.

¶25

Disposed of as withdrawn. All pending applica"ons, if any also stands

¶26

disposed of.

¶27

28.11.2023 (ANOOP CHITKARA) Jyo! Sharma JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

¶28

�

¶29

Jyoti Sharma 2023.11.29 14:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Sector 1, High Court, Chandigarh

Manjit Singh Sethi v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manjit Singh Sethi v. State of Punjab

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

Bhupinder Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Baljinder Singh Vs State of Punjab and Another

Bahadur Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab

Surinder Pal Singh @ Pehalwan Vs State of Punjab and Another

Pawan @ Pandit @ Mahavir Vs State of Haryana

Ravinder Kumar Vs State of Punjab