The petitioner sought quashing of an FIR under Section 482 CrPC. The counsel for the petitioner requested withdrawal of the petition. The High Court disposed of the matter as withdrawn along with any pending applications.
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.
256 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M No. 7468 of 2019
Date of Decision: 21.08.2024
Sanjeev Bhalla and others
...Pe%%oners
Versus
State of Punjab …Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA
Present: Ms. Ramandeep Kaur, Advocate and Mr. Inderjit Singh Chawla, Advocate for the pe%%oners.
Mr. Jasjit Singh, D.A.G., Punjab.
ANOOP CHITKARA, J.
| FIR No. | Dated | Police Sta%on | Sec%ons |
|---|---|---|---|
| 140 | 28.10.2018 | Tibba, Police Commissionerate | 306 IPC |
| Ludhiana,District Ludhiana |
Seeking quashing of FIR cap%oned above, the pe%%oners have come up before this Court under Sec%on 482 CrPC.
At the very outset, counsel for the pe%%oners wishes to withdraw the present pe%%on.
Disposed of as withdrawn. All pending applica%ons, if any, stand
disposed.
(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE
21.08.2024 Jyo% Sharma Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: No.
1
Jyoti Sharma 2024.08.23 16:54 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Sector 1, Chandigarh
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petition seeking quashing of the FIR under Section 482 CrPC should be allowed.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sanjeev Bhalla and others
State of Punjab
Anoop Chitkara
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
