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 6, Cited by 56]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Prithipal Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab And Another on 24 July, 2013

Author: Daya Chaudhary

Bench: Daya Chaudhary

                                                                         Kaur Gurpreet
             IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 2013.07.25    17:10
                                                     I attest to the accuracy and
                                                     integrity of this document
                        AT CHANDIGARH.               High Court, Chandigarh




                                      Crl. Misc. No.M-38946 of 2012
                                      Date of Decision: 24.07.2013


Prithipal Singh and others                             ....Petitioners

             Versus

State of Punjab and another                           ....Respondents


BEFORE :- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY

Present:-    Mr. Liaqat Ali, Advocate
             for the petitioners.

                          *****

DAYA CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL)

The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C for quashing of cross case got registered by respondent No.2 through DDR No.6 dated 24.09.2007 in FIR No.144 dated 20.09.2007 under Sections 325/324/323/148/149 IPC at Police Station Mehna, District Moga.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a false case has been registered against the petitioners which is clear from the statement given by the villagers including some respectable persons like ex-panch and members panchayat. Learned counsel also submits that there is no progress in the case as the charges were framed in the year 2009 and till date, no witness from the complainant side has been examined by the trial Court.

On the basis of the arguments raised by learned counsel for the petitioners, no ground is made out to quash the FIR.

The petition is accordingly dismissed.

However, keeping in view the facts that the charges were framed in the year 2009 and no witness has been examined so far, the trial Court is directed to make all efforts to expedite the trial.

(DAYA CHAUDHARY) 24.07.2013 JUDGE gurpreet