Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 8, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Rajan @ Rajender And Others vs State Of Haryana And Another on 28 August, 2024

Author: Anoop Chitkara

Bench: Anoop Chitkara

                                         Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:111978




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                          AT CHANDIGARH


280                                      CRM-M No.26010 of 2024
                                         Date of Decision:28.08.2024

Rajan @ Rajender and others

                                                                    ....Petitioner(s)
                                        Versus

State of Haryana and another

                                                                  .....Respondent(s)


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

             ****

Present:     Mr. Johan Kumar, Advocate,
             for the petitioners.

             Mr. Aashish Bishnoi, DAG, Haryana

             Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Advocate,
             for respondent No.2.

             ****

ANOOP CHITKARA, J. (Oral)

FIR Date Police Station Under Sections No. 122 30.07.2020 Tigaon, District 323, 384, 427, 506, 34 IPC and Faridabad Sections 448, 201 IPC added later on.

1. By way of this petition, the petitioner is seeking quashing of FIR No.122, dated 30.07.2020, under Sections 323, 384, 427, 506, 34 IPC (Sections 448 and 201 IPC added later on), registered at Police Station Tigaon, District Faridabad.

2. Reply on behalf of the respondent-State has been filed, which is 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 02-09-2024 23:31:56 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:111978 CRM-M No.26010 of 2024 -2- taken on record and a copy thereof has been supplied to learned counsel for the petitioner.

3. After arguing for sometime, counsel for the petitioners submits he may be permitted to file an application for discharge raising all the points raised in this petition and the trial Court be directed to decide the same before framing of the charges.

4. Counsel for the State has not been able to controvert the aforesaid submissions.

5. Given above, the present petition is disposed of with the following observations:-

The petitioner is permitted to file an application for discharge within a period of 15 days from today i.e. by 12.09.2024, if such an application is filed then the trial Court before proceeding further decide the said application. It is clarified that if the petitioner seeks unnecessary adjournment, in that eventuality this order stands recalled automatically.

6. Pending application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of.





                                                     (ANOOP CHITKARA)
                                                          JUDGE
August 28, 2024
dinesh
                    Whether speaking                 :      Yes/No
                    Whether reportable               :      Yes/No




                                       2 of 2
                    ::: Downloaded on - 02-09-2024 23:31:57 :::