Saurav Bansal v. State Of Punjab And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-33276-2018 Date of Decision: 10.01.2023 Saurav Bansal ......... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and another ......... Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

Present:

Mr. L.S. Mann, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Virat Rana, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. Vijiyesh Malhotra, Advocate for Mr. Sandeep Srui, Advocate, for respondent No.2 **** ANOOP CHITKARA, J. (ORAL) State counsel as well as counsel for respondent No.2 has opposed the present petition on the grounds that during the pendency of present petition in the absence of stay, the charges have been framed and the said order has not been challenged. Once a judicial order has been passed for framing the charges, it has to be separately challenged which was not done. However, since the matter was pending before this Court, as such, the limitation to challenge the same will start from today and it shall be permissible for the petitioner either to challenge the same before the Sessions Court under Section 397 read with Section 401 Cr.P.C or before this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

Given above, the present petition stands disposed of. All pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 10.01.2023 Jyoti-II Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No JYOTI 2023.01.13 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.