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 7, Cited by 5]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Prem Kumar Son Of Harpal Rai, Lachman ... vs State Of Punjab Through The ... on 15 January, 2003

Author: Viney Mittal

Bench: Viney Mittal

JUDGMENT
 

Viney Mittal, J.  

 

1. The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioners for quashing of the complaint dated May 31, 1989 filed under the provisions of Section 3(k)(i) Sections 17, 18, 29 & 33 of the Insecticides Act, 1968. A copy of the aforesaid complaint has been appended as Annexure P-2 with the petition.

2. I have heard Shri J.S. Toor, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Shri Sandeep Jain, learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab and with their assistance have also gone through the copy of the complaint Annexure P-2 as well as the contents of the petition.

3. In my considered opinion, no case is made out for exercising the inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed. However, a liberty is granted to the petitioners to file an appropriate application before the learned trial Magistrate for dropping of the proceedings against them. While filing the aforesaid application, it shall be open to the petitioners to raise all the pleas raised by them in the present petition and other defences available to them in accordance with law before the trial Court. If any such application is filed by the petitioners then the trial Magistrate would decide the same on merits after affording an opportunity of hearing to all concerned.

4. The personal presence of the petitioners shall also remain exempted during the course of trial. However, the learned trial court is at liberty to secure the personal presence of the petitioners as and when the same is required by it in accordance with law.

5. Since the matter has remained pending in this Court for a sufficiently long time, therefore, the trial court is directed that the proceedings in the case be concluded expeditiously and in any case not later than July 31, 2004.