Ramesh Sanka Vs State of Haryana and Others — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Ramesh Sanka Vs State of Haryana and Others — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No substantive relief granted; writ petition dismissed with liberty reserved to the petitioner to re-access the Court on the same cause of action by instituting an appropriate motion (criminal main petition - CRMM) under the apt provisions of law.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to protection of his life and liberty, one of the reliefs sought through the writ petition. +1 more

Court's answer

The prayer for protection of the petitioner's life and liberty is rendered infructuous because, during pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner has been arrested and is in judicial custody.

Ratio / Principle

For quashing of an FIR, the apposite remedy prescribed in this High Court's Rules and Orders is to institute a criminal main petition (CRMM), and not the instant writ petition.

Key takeaways

The instant writ petition is dismissed, with liberty reserved to the petitioner to re-access the Court on the same cause of action by instituting an appropriate motion under the apt provisions of law; pending application(s) stand disposed of accordingly.ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh | Justice Kuldeep Tiwari (oral order, January 10, 2025) | CWP-20433-2024 (O&M) | Ramesh Sanka v. State of Haryana and others. A writ petition claiming (i) protection of the petitioner's life and liberty and (ii) quashing of an FIR was dismissed. The protection prayer was rendered infructuous as, during pendency of the petition, the petitioner was arrested and is in judicial custody. For quashing of the FIR, the Court held that the apposite remedy, as prescribed in this High Court's Rules and Orders, is to institute a criminal main petition (CRMM); liberty was reserved to the petitioner to re-access the Court on the same cause of action through an appropriate motion under the apt provisions of law. A written adjournment request circulated by the petitioner's counsel was declined, and pending application(s) were disposed of accordingly.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

106 CWP-20433-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision : January 10, 2025

RAMESH SANKA -PETITIONER

V/S

STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS -RESPONDENTS

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI

Present: Mr. Nilesh Bhardwaj, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Deepak Sabharwal, Addl. A.G., Haryana.

KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (ORAL)

A written request for adjournment has been circulated by the learned counsel for the petitioner, however, the request is declined.

Since one of the reliefs yearned to be reaped through instituting the instant writ petition appertains to protection of petitioner’s life and liberty, it is informed to this Court by the learned State counsel that, during pendency of the instant writ petition, the petitioner has been arrested and he is in judicial custody. Therefore, the prayer for protection of life and liberty is rendered infructuous.

Moreover, one of the other reliefs claimed by the petitioner in the instant writ petition is for quashing of FIR, for which the apposite remedy to be availed by the petitioner, and as prescribed in this High Court’s Rules and Orders, is to institute a criminal main petition (CRMM), therefore, the instant writ petition is dismissed . However, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to re-access this Court on the same cause of

DEVINDER YADAV 2025.01.14 09:09 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

CWP-20433-2024 (O&M)

2

action, but, by instituting an appropriate motion under the apt provisions of law.

Pending application(s) stand disposed of accordingly.

January 10, 2025	(KU	LDEEP TIWARI) JUDGE
devinder
Whether speaking/reasoned	:	Yes/No
Whether Reportable	:	Yes/No

DEVINDER YADAV 2025.01.14 09:09 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment