High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/6355/2024disposed of

Raj Kumar v. Union Of India And Another

2024-04-05Mr. Justice Jagmohan Bansal2 pages

CWP-6355-2024 2024:PHHC:046368

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP-6355-2024 Date of Decision : 05.04.2024 RAJ KUMAR ... PETITIONER

Versus

UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER ... RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL

Present:

Mr.Chetan Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Neha Sharma, Sr.Panel Counsel for the respondent-UOI (through VC).

Mr. Aman Dhir, DAG, Punjab.

*** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (Oral) 1.

The petitioner through instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is seeking direction to respondents to re-issue him passport. 2.

Mr. Chetan Bansal, Advocate, inter alia contends that respondents are not processing application of the petitioner on the ground that criminal case is pending whereas it is factually incorrect because police has already exonerated him in FIR No. 59 dated 08.04.2021, under Sections 379, 120-B of IPC and Section 25, 54, 59 of the Arms Act, 1989. Trial is pending against other accused.

Learned State counsel submits that as per his instructions, it is factually correct that the petitioner has been found innocent in the afore-stated FIR. No trial is pending against him.

Anju Goel 2024.04.05 14:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CWP-6355-2024 2024:PHHC:046368 4.

Faced with this, Ms. Neha Sharma, Sr. Panel Counsel submits that application of the petitioner would be considered and dispose of within 08 weeks from today.

Learned counsel for the petitioner agrees to aforesaid arrangement. 6.

In the wake of statement of both sides, the present petition stands disposed of.

(JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE 05.04.2024 anju Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No Anju Goel 2024.04.05 14:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh