Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 15 (0.43 seconds)Section 229A in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 482 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 3A in The Haryana Prevention of Defacement of Property Act, 1989 [Entire Act]
The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985
Section 82 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Pardeep Kumar And Others vs State Of Punjab And Another on 22 September, 2022
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner in addition submits
that in view of the judgments passed by this Court in Pardeep
Kumar vs State of Punjab and another, Law Finder Doc Id#
2325731 and Darshan Singh vs State of Punjab and others,
Law Finder Doc Id # 2529290, the impugned FIR is not
maintainable.
Section 138 in The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 [Entire Act]
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Daljit Singh And Another vs The State Of Haryana And Others on 1 March, 2013
The statutory provision of Section 229A of IPC, when perused
in the light of ratio decidendi of the judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Daljit Singh (supra) and of this Court in the
case of Sanjeet (supra) unequivocally shows that an FIR under
MANGAL SINGH
2026.04.30 18:07
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
10
254 CRM-M-21702-2024 (O&M)
Section 229A of the IPC does not proprio vigore become liable
to be quashed, in case the main trial has been decided on merits
and culminated in acquittal. However, at the same time, the
factum of acquittal and the said judgment having attained
finality, is indubitably, a relevant factor to be considered while
dealing with a plea for quashing of an FIR (as also proceedings
emanating therefrom) under Section 229A of IPC. This fact
assumes greater significance considering that once the main
trial has been decided on merits and culminated in acquittal,
the ancillary proceedings which have no independent existence,
cannot be permitted to continue, as the same would amount to
abuse of the process of law. Such litigation, especially in the
backdrop of main trial having been decided and result in
acquittal, will have an adverse impact on the overburdened
Court-dockets. Allowing such prosecution, when the main trial
has resulted in acquittal would undermine the legislative intent;
thereby contravening the principles of fairness, proportionality,
and justice in criminal proceedings. A literal interpretation may
sometimes lead to unjust outcomes that also contradict the
law's underlying purpose. Therefore, the High Court under its
inherent jurisdiction must balance the letter of Law with its
spirit, ensuring fair and equitable results. This approach
underscores Law's role as an apparatus for fostering societal
harmony and addressing the real-world complexities,
efficaciously as also effectively, rather than mere
literal/technical compliance.