Poonam Puri v. State Of Haryana
CRM-M-5710-2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-5710-2020 Date of Decision: 22.08.2024 Poonam Puri ....Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana ....Respondent CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA
Present:
Mr. Vishal Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Ashish Bishnoi, DAG, Haryana.
Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Advocate and Mr. Gautam Kaile, Advocate for the complainant.
***** ANOOP CHITKARA, J.
FIR No.
Dated Police Station Sections 28.07.2010 Model Town, 403, 405, 408, 409, 411, 467, 471, 477-A, 420, Panipat 120-B, 477 IPC Seeking quashing of FIR captioned above, petitioner has come up before this Court by filing the present petition under Section 482 CrPC. 2.
State counsel on instructions submits that charges have been framed. 3.
Given the above contention that the charges have been framed and judicial order has been passed and report under Section 173 CrPC would merge in the said order and it is legally required to challenge the same. 4.
Faced with the situation, petitioner's counsel seeks permission to withdraw the present petition with liberty to challenge the order of framing of charges also.
ANJU RANI 2024.08.23 16:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh
CRM-M-5710-2020 5.
Given above, petition is disposed of as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. It is clarified that filing and withdrawal of the present petition shall not come in the way, in case petitioner chooses to file fresh petition in accordance with law. It is made clear that in case such petition is filed, the time for which the present petition was pending before this Court, shall not be counted while calculating the delay in challenging the framing of charges. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 22.08.2024 anju rani Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable?
No ANJU RANI 2024.08.23 16:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh