Disposed¶22

Parveen Rani Alias Parveen Kumari v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC5 Feb 2026CRM-M/11588/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Direction to trial Court to conclude trial; petition disposed of as infructuous after stay qua co-accused vacated on acceptance of her revision petition CRR-234-2022. Keywords: CRM-M-11588-2024; Parveen Rani @Parveen Kumari; State of Punjab & Anr.; Gurpreet Kaur; CRR-234-2022; same FIR; interim order stands vacated automatically; trial Court direction; Punjab & Haryana High Court; Surya Partap Singh, J.; 05.02.2026.

What did the court decide?

None; petition disposed of as infructuous, no direction or clarification issued, and pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stood disposed of accordingly. ¶22

Parveen Rani Alias Parveen Kumari Vs State of Punjab and Anr. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; petition disposed of as infructuous, no direction or clarification issued, and pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stood disposed of accordingly.

¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether the learned trial Court should be directed to finally dispose of the trial against the petitioner and pass the final order, given that proceedings qua co-accused Gurpreet Kaur in a connected petition (same FIR) stood stayed and the trial Court considered itself unable to pronounce the judgment qua the petitioner.

¶16

Court's answer

Since the revision petition preferred by co-accused Gurpreet Kaur, wherein there was a stay order qua her trial, has been accepted vide order of the even date passed in CRR-234-2022, any interim order passed in the connected matter stands vacated automatically.

¶21

Ratio / Principle

In view of the automatic vacation of the interim order, there is no need either of any direction or of any clarification sought by the petitioner.

¶22

Key takeaways

In the given fact situation the petition has become infructuous and is disposed of being infructuous; pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of accordingly.ratio¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh (Surya Partap Singh, J.), CRM-M-11588-2024 (O&M), decided 05.02.2026: Parveen Rani @Parveen Kumari v. State of Punjab & Anr. The petitioner sought a direction to the learned trial Court to finally dispose of the trial against her, on the ground that in a connected petition pertaining to the same FIR the trial Court had stayed proceedings qua co-accused Gurpreet Kaur and had formed the opinion that the judgment qua the petitioner could not be pronounced, and was therefore not deciding the case. The Court noted that the revision petition preferred by the co-accused, wherein there was a stay order qua her trial, had been accepted vide order of even date passed in CRR-234-2022, so any interim order stood vacated automatically. Holding that no direction or clarification was needed, the Court disposed of the petition as infructuous; pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stood disposed of accordingly.

¶1

CRM-M-11588-2024 (O&M)

¶2

¶3

..... Respondent

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶5

120-II CRM-M-11588-2024 (O&M) Date of decision : 05.02.2026

¶6

Parveen Rani @Parveen Kumari

¶7

..... Petitioner

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

State of Punjab & Anr.

¶10

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA PARTAP SINGH

¶11

Present : Mr. Vishal Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr. Eklavya Darshi, DAG Punjab.

¶13

Mr. Kartik Gupta, Advocate for the respondent No.2.

¶14

¶15

SURYA PARTAP SINGH, J.

¶16

This petition seeking for direction to the learned trial Court to finally dispose of the trial being faced by the petitioner, has been filed on the ground that in a connected petition, pertaining to the same FIR, proceedings qua co-accused Gurpreet Kaur were stayed by the learned trial Court, but the learned trial Court formed a wrong opinion that the judgment qua petitioner cannot be pronounced. According to petitioner, in view of abovementioned impression the learned trial Court is not deciding the case filed against the petitioner. Hence the request for appropriate direction to the learned trial Court to pass the final order.

¶17

Since the revision petition preferred by the co-accused Gurpreet Kaur, wherein there was a stay order qua trial of Gurpreet Kaur, has been

¶18

GAURAV THAKUR 2026.02.08 14:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶19

CRM-M-11588-2024 (O&M)

¶20

¶21

accepted vide order of the even date passed in CRR-234-2022, any interim order passed in the abovementioned case stands vacated automatically.

¶22

In view of above, there is no need either of any direction or of any clarification, sought by the petitioner. Rather in the given fact situation, the present petition has become infructuous. Hence, the present petition is hereby disposed of being infructuous.

¶23

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of, accordingly.

¶24

(SURYA PARTAP SINGH) JUDGE 05.02.2026 Gaurav Thakur Whether speaking / reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No

¶25

GAURAV THAKUR 2026.02.08 14:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Parveen Rani Alias Parveen Kumari v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parveen Rani Alias Parveen Kumari v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sukhwinder Singh Vs State of Punjab and Others

Ranjit Singh Vs State of Punjab

Ishika Bhardwaj Vs State of Haryana

Gurpreet Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Another

Harbhajan Kaur Vs State of Haryana

Birbal Dass Vs State of Punjab & Anr.