MEGH NATH AND ORS. Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.
LAWS(P&H)-2016-2-64
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on February 17,2016

Megh Nath And Ors. Appellant
VERSUS
State of Punjab and Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Naresh Kumar Sanghi, J. - (1.) Prayer in this petition, filed under Sec. 482, Cr.P.C., is for quashing of FIR No. 78, dated 19.12.2009, (Annexure P -1) for the offences punishable under Ss. 148, 323, 427, 447, 511, 452 and 506 read with Sec. 149, IPC, registered at Police Station, Koom Kalan, District Ludhiana, and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom; for quashing of the report under Sec. 173, Cr.P.C., dated 12.04.2010 (Annexure P -6); for quashing of the charges framed against the petitioners vide order dated 15.03.2011 (Annexure P -8) and to award appropriate compensation to the aggrieved persons.
(2.) Vide order dated 27.04.2012, notice of motion was issued. Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 filed their reply. Despite service, respondent Nos. 5 and 6 failed to appear however at a later stage, they appeared through their advocate Mr. H.S. Bedi. On 30.07.2014, despite calling the case twice, when the petitioners failed to appear before this Court then noticing the fact that on the previous date i.e 01.04.2014 also none had appeared on behalf of the petitioners, therefore, the case was dismissed for want of prosecution.
(3.) An application for restoration of the case was moved by the petitioners and the notice of the said application was issued to the respondents. When none appeared on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 to 7, then this Court vide its order dated 05.12.2014 restored the main petition at its original number and as such, the case has been argued by learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel representing the State of Punjab and learned counsel for respondent No. 7 only. Before proceeding further, it is made clear that petitioner Nos. 1 to 5 earlier filed the similar petition bearing CRM -M -31429 of 2011 which was dismissed as withdrawn on 01.12.2011 under the order of a Co - ordinate Bench. At that time, Jagtar Singh (PW -2) was yet to be cross -examined in the trial Court. New ground for filing of the present quashing petition as mentioned by the petitioners in para No. 59 at page 53 of the present petition is that now Jagtar Singh (PW -2) has been cross -examined, therefore, the present petition is maintainable.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.