Manu Nath v. State of Punjab
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. Disposed of as withdrawn with liberty to file an application for discharge, if charges not framed so far. If such application is filed, trial Court is requested to answer each and every point so raised in the said application and shall also consider all…
Judgment
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present: Mr. Shivam Grover, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Jasdev Singh Thind, D.A.G., Punjab. ANOOP CHITKARA, J. **** FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections 139
22.10.2019 Sri Chamkaur 406, 420, 120-B IPC Sahib, District (Sections 465, 467, 468, 471 Rupnagar IPC added later on)
#1. Seeking quashing of the FIR captioned above, the petitioner has come up before this Court under Section 482 CrPC.
#2. Petitioner seeks quashing of FIR on the ground that the co-accused have been acquitted of the offence because all the witnesses turned hostile. State counsel submits that it is a case of no evidence and certainly prosecution will not be launched, if not already launched and he has liberty to raise all these points at the time of framing of charges and they will not object to the same.
#3. Needless to say that framing of charge is not an empty formality and the concerned trial Court has to draw prima facie satisfaction of existence of legally admissible evidence.
#4. At this stage, counsel for the petitioner wishes to withdraw with liberty that pleadings made in the petition should not be read in evidence with liberty to file an application for discharge before the trial Court if the stage arises. If such an application is filed, then the said application shall also be decided not later than passing of the order on charges. Jyoti Sharma 2025.05.26 16:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Sector 1, Chandigarh 1 CRM-M-10245-2024 (O&M)
#5. Disposed of as withdrawn with liberty to file an application for discharge, if charges not framed so far. If such application is filed, trial Court is requested to answer each and every point so raised in the said application and shall also consider all admissible evidence. The order so passed must be reasoned one. All pending applications, if any also stands disposed of. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE
22.05.2025 Jyoti Sharma Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes No. Whether reportable: Jyoti Sharma 2025.05.26 16:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Sector 1, Chandigarh 2
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Penal Code, 1860; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 22 May 2025. The bench was ANOOP CHITKARA.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.
Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.