Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (0.58 seconds)Rajesh Khanna And Another vs State Of Haryana And Another on 19 December, 2012
In this view of the matter, the case of the petitioner, would
appear to be fully covered by various decisions of this Court, in similar
1 of 2
::: Downloaded on - 09-11-2020 02:11:06 :::
CRM-M-18844-2020 2
circumstances, wherein proceedings initiated by drawing up FIRs under
Section 174-A of the IPC, where the accused had initially jumped bail or
failed to appear before the concerned Trial Court, were quashed in view of
the compromise having been arrived at between the concerned parties,
which are CRM-M-3813-2017 titled as "Rajneesh Khanna Vs. State of
Haryana and another", decided on 26.10.2017, CRM-M-32465-2017
titled as "Vikas Sharma Vs. Gurpreet Singh Kohli and another",
decided on 13.09.2017, CRM-M-5895-2012 titled as "Raj Kumar Vs.
State of Haryana", decided on 13.09.2012 and CRM-M-15598-2019 titled
as "Mahender Pal Jindal Vs. State of Haryana", decided on 06.02.2020.
Vikas Sharma vs Gurpreet Singh Kohli And Another on 13 September, 2017
In this view of the matter, the case of the petitioner, would
appear to be fully covered by various decisions of this Court, in similar
1 of 2
::: Downloaded on - 09-11-2020 02:11:06 :::
CRM-M-18844-2020 2
circumstances, wherein proceedings initiated by drawing up FIRs under
Section 174-A of the IPC, where the accused had initially jumped bail or
failed to appear before the concerned Trial Court, were quashed in view of
the compromise having been arrived at between the concerned parties,
which are CRM-M-3813-2017 titled as "Rajneesh Khanna Vs. State of
Haryana and another", decided on 26.10.2017, CRM-M-32465-2017
titled as "Vikas Sharma Vs. Gurpreet Singh Kohli and another",
decided on 13.09.2017, CRM-M-5895-2012 titled as "Raj Kumar Vs.
State of Haryana", decided on 13.09.2012 and CRM-M-15598-2019 titled
as "Mahender Pal Jindal Vs. State of Haryana", decided on 06.02.2020.
Raj Kumar & Ors vs Haryana State & Ors on 27 August, 2007
In this view of the matter, the case of the petitioner, would
appear to be fully covered by various decisions of this Court, in similar
1 of 2
::: Downloaded on - 09-11-2020 02:11:06 :::
CRM-M-18844-2020 2
circumstances, wherein proceedings initiated by drawing up FIRs under
Section 174-A of the IPC, where the accused had initially jumped bail or
failed to appear before the concerned Trial Court, were quashed in view of
the compromise having been arrived at between the concerned parties,
which are CRM-M-3813-2017 titled as "Rajneesh Khanna Vs. State of
Haryana and another", decided on 26.10.2017, CRM-M-32465-2017
titled as "Vikas Sharma Vs. Gurpreet Singh Kohli and another",
decided on 13.09.2017, CRM-M-5895-2012 titled as "Raj Kumar Vs.
State of Haryana", decided on 13.09.2012 and CRM-M-15598-2019 titled
as "Mahender Pal Jindal Vs. State of Haryana", decided on 06.02.2020.
Mahender Pal Jindal And Others vs State Of Haryana And Another on 6 February, 2020
In this view of the matter, the case of the petitioner, would
appear to be fully covered by various decisions of this Court, in similar
1 of 2
::: Downloaded on - 09-11-2020 02:11:06 :::
CRM-M-18844-2020 2
circumstances, wherein proceedings initiated by drawing up FIRs under
Section 174-A of the IPC, where the accused had initially jumped bail or
failed to appear before the concerned Trial Court, were quashed in view of
the compromise having been arrived at between the concerned parties,
which are CRM-M-3813-2017 titled as "Rajneesh Khanna Vs. State of
Haryana and another", decided on 26.10.2017, CRM-M-32465-2017
titled as "Vikas Sharma Vs. Gurpreet Singh Kohli and another",
decided on 13.09.2017, CRM-M-5895-2012 titled as "Raj Kumar Vs.
State of Haryana", decided on 13.09.2012 and CRM-M-15598-2019 titled
as "Mahender Pal Jindal Vs. State of Haryana", decided on 06.02.2020.
1