CRM-M No. 45758 of 2021 · Punjab & Haryana High Court
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
(cid:6)(cid:12)(cid:7)(cid:27)(cid:7)(cid:11)(cid:8)(cid:30)(cid:4)(cid:31)(cid:4)(cid:4) Mr. Harshit Singla, Advocate (Legal Aid Counsel) (cid:4) (cid:4) (cid:4) (cid:4) (cid:4) (cid:4) ((cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:9)(cid:17)(cid:1)’ (cid:1)(cid:16)(cid:5)(cid:15)(cid:11)(cid:17))(cid:15)(cid:14)+(cid:1)(cid:14) (cid:1),(cid:9)-(cid:19)./ "(cid:12)(cid:5)(cid:4)#(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:5)(cid:16)(cid:4)(cid:16)$%!$(cid:12)&$’((cid:4)(cid:25)(cid:19))((cid:4)(cid:6)*(cid:11)+$%(cid:5)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:4) ,,,,,(cid:4) (cid:4) (cid:4) The instant petition has been filed for seeking quashing of the FIR No. 46 dated 08.07.2015 registered under Sections 420, 460 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Sadar Rampura District Bathinda whereby the petitioner had been summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C to face trial alongwith the other co-accused. A further challenge was raised to the order dated 28.11.2017 whereby the petitioner had been declared as proclaimed person.
VISHAL SHARMA 2025.09.10 11:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (cid:8)(cid:11)$0$0(cid:31)#1#20"(cid:30)"3(cid:1) (cid:4) (cid:1) (cid:1) (cid:1) (cid:31)(cid:1)(cid:31)(cid:4) Since there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner, hence, Mr. Harshit Singla, Advocate is appointed as Legal Aid Counsel, PH- 3650-2024, Mobile No. 9050904275. Learned Legal Aid Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that so far as the subsequent dispute is concerned, the same has already been amicably resolved amongst the parties and the FIR as well as all consequential proceedings arising therefrom have since been quashed. Counsel for the respondent-State submits that the petitioner had surrendered subsequent to order declaring him as proclaimed person and the proceedings against the petitioner also stand culminated and no cause of action would survive any further. Legal Aid Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner thus contends that in view of the aforesaid statement made at par by the State Counsel on instructions from Sub Inspector Dilbagh Singh, the present petition has been rendered infructuous at this stage.
Ordered accordingly. (cid:1)(cid:1) (cid:1) (cid:1) ’(cid:6)(cid:13)(cid:4)$(cid:6)(cid:16)(cid:6)(cid:11)(cid:1)(cid:30)(cid:31)+(cid:1)"(cid:30)"#(cid:1)(cid:1) (cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:7)(cid:8)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:9)(cid:10)(cid:5)(cid:7) (cid:1) (cid:1) (cid:1) (cid:1) (cid:1) ,((cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:9)(cid:17)(cid:1)’ (cid:1)(cid:16)(cid:5)(cid:15)(cid:11)(cid:17))(cid:15)(cid:14)/(cid:1)(cid:4) (cid:1) (cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:14)(cid:10)(cid:17)(cid:7)(cid:6) (cid:7) (cid:4) (cid:4) (cid:4) -!(cid:7)(cid:8)!(cid:7)(cid:12)(cid:4)(cid:27)(cid:28)(cid:7)$.(cid:9)(cid:11)/0(cid:12)(cid:7)$(cid:27)(cid:10)(cid:11)(cid:7)(cid:29)(cid:1) -!(cid:7)(cid:8)!(cid:7)(cid:12)(cid:4)(cid:15)(cid:7)(cid:28)(cid:10)(cid:12)(cid:8)$%’(cid:7)(cid:4) (cid:4) (cid:29)(cid:1) (cid:30)(cid:4) 1(cid:7)(cid:27)0(cid:22)(cid:10)(cid:4) 1(cid:7)(cid:27)0(cid:22)(cid:10)(cid:4) (cid:4) VISHAL SHARMA 2025.09.10 11:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.