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 2, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Janak Raj Baraik vs The Managing Director, The Punjab State ... on 18 May, 2017

Author: Jaishree Thakur

Bench: Jaishree Thakur

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                      CHANDIGARH

                                        CWP No. 10857 of 2017
                                        Date of decision: 18.05.2017

Janak Raj Baraik
                                                                  ...Petitioner
                                    Versus

Managing Director, the Punjab State Co-operative Development Federation
Ltd.
                                                          ...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR

Present:     Mr. Balwinder Singh, Advocate,
             for the petitioner.

                   ****

JAISHREE THAKUR, J. (ORAL)

The instant writ petition has been filed seeking to quash the charge-sheet and the proceedings thereunder.

It is contended that the petitioner herein was named in an FIR No. 229 dated 18.11.2011 which was under Sections 370 and 271 IPC registered at Police Station-3, Chandigarh. Under the said proceedings, the petitioner has now been honourably acquitted by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Chandigarh. The petitioner has approached the department to drop the proceedings pending against him, however, the department has not taken any note of the said request. It is further contended that after a charge-sheet that had been issued, he was suspended in 2011 but later by an order dated 07.11.2014 he was reinstated in service under Rule 7.3 of the Punjab Civil Services Volume-I, pending departmental inquiry.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and in view of the law as settled that there should be no interference in the proceedings that have been initiated under a charge-sheet, this Court is not inclined to interfere.

1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 06-06-2017 09:03:09 ::: CWP No. 10857 of 2017 -2- However, since the charge-sheet has been pending for an inordinate length of period, let proceedings under the charge-sheet be completed as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of eight months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

The writ petition stands disposed of.




18.05.2017                                           (JAISHREE THAKUR)
Satyawan                                                  JUDGE

Whether speaking/reasoned                            Yes.
Whether reportable                                   No.




                                      2 of 2
                   ::: Downloaded on - 06-06-2017 09:03:10 :::