Dr Harpeet Panesar v. State Of Haryana

CRM-M-38830-2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.38830 of 2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 12.08.2024 Dr. Harpreet Panesar

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

Present:

Mr. V.K. Agnihotri, Advocate with Mr. Anuj Y. Attri, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Vikrant Pamboo, Sr. DAG, Haryana.

**** ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections 29.03.2023 Cyber Crime, Nuh, Distt.

Mewat (Haryana) 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and Sections 7, 13, P.C.Act, 1988 (subsequently added) Seeking quashing of FIR captioned above, the petitioner has come up before this Court under Section 482, Cr.P.C.

2.

Counsel for the State on instructions submits that the petitioner seeks quashing of FIR. However, charges have been framed on 09.08.2024, after filing of the present petition. He submits that once a judicial order has been passed framing the charges, that judicial order must be explicitly challenged which has not been done in the present case, for the reasons, that the present petition was filed prior to framing of charges, rendering the present petition not maintainable.

Sonia Puri 2024.08.20 09:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-38830-2024 3.

On this, counsel for the petitioner intends to withdraw the present petition with liberty to file fresh petition.

4.

Given above, the present petition is hereby, disposed of, as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. Since the charges have been framed during the pendency of the present petition as such, limitation to challenge the order of framing of charges shall start from tomorrow. All pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 12.08.2024 Sonia Puri Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No.

Sonia Puri 2024.08.20 09:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document