Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. sought quashing of an FIR and summoning order. The State informed the Court that the FIR and all proceedings had already been quashed by a Coordinate Bench on the basis of compromise. Petition dismissed as withdrawn.
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.
CRM-M-12033-2022 - 1-
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
242 CRM-M-12033-2022 (O&M) Date of decision: 05.11.2024
Jaswinder Kaur
...Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Punjab and another
...Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA
Present: Mr. Dharam Bir Bhargav, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Rishu Madan, A.A.G., Punjab.
NIDHI GUPTA, J. (Oral)
Prayer in the 1st Petition u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is for quashing of FIR No.21 dated 02.05.2012 (Annexure P-1), registered under section 406,498-A,420, 34 IPC, at Police Station Dorngla, District Gurdaspur; and order dated 27.05.2015 (Annexure P-10) passed by learned JMIC, Gurdaspur, whereby the petitioner was summoned for appearance and all for 06.07.2015; and all subsequent proceedings relating thereto or arising therefrom.
Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from SI Davinder Kumar, SHO Darangla, informs this Court that the present petition has been rendered infructuous as learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class has noted in his order dated 05.01.2016 that the above said FIR stood quashed vide order dated 15.12.2015 passed in CRM-M-256962015 titled as ‘ Surjit Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another ’ by a Coordinate Bench of this Court. A copy of the said order dated 15.12.2015 is also appended with the present petition as Annexure P-7
DIVYANSHI 2024.11.06 10:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CRM-M-12033-2022 - 2-
which reflects that the “ aforesaid FIR alongwith all criminal proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby quashed, on the basis of compromise. ”
In view of the same, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he may be permitted to withdraw the present petition.
Permitted to do so.
Dismissed as withdrawn.
Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.
(NIDHI GUPTA)
05.11.2024 (NIDHI GUPTA) Divyanshi JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable:
Yes/No Yes/No
DIVYANSHI 2024.11.06 10:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Surjit Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and anotherReferred
CRM-M-25696-2015
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Jaswinder Kaur
State of Punjab
Nidhi Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
