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 13, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Supreet Singh Dilawar vs State Of U.T on 3 April, 2012

Crl. Misc. No.M-6834 of 2012                                            1



            IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                       AT CHANDIGARH.

                                            Crl. Misc. No.M-6834 of 2012
                                            Date of Decision: 03.04.2012

Supreet Singh Dilawar
                                                     ....Petitioner

             Versus

State of U.T., Chandigarh and others

                                                    ...Respondents


CORAM : Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur

Present:-    Mr. Munish Bhardwaj, Advocate
             for the petitioner.

                          *****

          1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be
             allowed to see the judgment ?
          2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ?
          3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the
             Digest ?
          **
NIRMALJIT KAUR, J. (ORAL)

This is a petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C for quashing of FIR No.89 dated 05.05.2009 under Sections 376, 377, 354, 506, 292 of IPC and Section 67-B (b & e) of I.T. Act (Sections 363, 366, 452 IPC and Sections 6 and 8 of Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition), Act added later on) registered at Police Station Sector 31, Chandigarh being investigated by CIA Staff, Sector 11, Chandigarh and all proceedings arising thereon.

It is contended that the FIR was registered way back on 05.05.2009. The petitioner is stated to be a juvenile. It is further stated that as per Section 14 of the Act, Inquiry by Board regarding Juvenile shall be completed within a period of four months from the date of its Crl. Misc. No.M-6834 of 2012 2 commencement. Whereas, almost three years have been passed but the inquiry has still not been completed.

In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the Juvenile Justice Board, where the matter is pending, to conclude the same as expeditiously as possible preferably within three months from today.

(NIRMALJIT KAUR) 03.04.2012 JUDGE gurpreet