The single-judge High Court dismissed a petition seeking quashing of a criminal complaint under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for non-prosecution after the petitioners remained absent on the date of hearing.
Petition dismissed for non-prosecution; pending applications disposed of.
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.
-1-
276 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M No.26530 of 2024(O&M)
Date of Decision: 19.11.2024
Sandeep Singh & Others
... Petitioners
Versus
Baldev Singh … Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA
Present: None for the petitioners.
Mr. Fateh Sahota, Advocate with
Ms. Sukhan Rangi, Advocate and
Mr. S.S. Rangi, Advocate for the respondent.
ANOOP CHITKARA, J .
Complaint No. 89 dated 23.12.2012 titled as “Baldev Singh Vs. Pardeep Singh and Others”
It is clarified that in case the petitioners remain absent on the next date of hearing, then this Court shall dismiss the case for non-prosecution. It is further clarified that pendency of this petition shall be inconsequential.”
(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE
19.11.2024 Sonia Puri Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No.
Sonia Puri 2024.11.21 11:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Sandeep Singh & Others
Baldev Singh
Anoop Chitkara
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
