Lakhwinder Singh vs State Of Punjab And Another
2024 Latest Caselaw 20915 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Lakhwinder Singh vs State Of Punjab And Another on 25 November, 2024

Author: Anoop Chitkara

Bench: Anoop Chitkara

                     121                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

                                                                         CRM-M No. 57094 of 2024
                                                                         Date of Decision: 25.11.2024

                     Lakhwinder Singh                                            ...Pe   oner

                                                                      Versus

                     State of Punjab and another                                 ...Respondents

                     CORAM:               HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

                     Present:             Mr. A.S. Jawandha, Advocate            for the pe     oner.

                                Ms. Swa Batra, D.A.G., Punjab.
                                            ****
                     ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

                       FIR No.             Dated             Police Sta on       Sec ons
                       183                 08.08.2020        Sadar        Nabha, 353, 186, 506 IPC
                                                             District Pa ala

1. Seeking quashing of the FIR cap oned above, report under Sec on 173 CrPC and challan dated 23.02.2022, the pe oner has come up before this Court under Sec on 528 BNSS, 2023.

2. State counsel submits that earlier the pe oner had filed CRR No.2022 of 2024 seeking quashing of order dated 11.07.2024 vide which trial Court dismissed the applica on under Sec on 239 CrPC but without challenging the charges, the said pe on was disposed of as withdrawn vide order dated 18.10.2024. Now again, for the second me the pe oner has approached this Court but this me also, charges have not been challenged. State counsel further submits that she has specific instruc ons that charges have been framed, as such the present pe on is not maintainable because the order of framing of charges is required to be challenged explicitly.

3. Given above, the present pe on is dismissed with clarifica on that in case pe oner challenges the order of framing of charges, then the me for which the present pe on was pending before this Court shall not be counted for the purpose of limita on. All pending applica ons, if any, stand disposed.

                                                                                 (ANOOP CHITKARA)
                                                                                     JUDGE
                     25.11.2024
                     Jyo Sharma
                     Whether speaking/reasoned:                 Yes
                     Whether reportable:                        No.





authenticity of this order/judgment
High Court, Sector 1, Chandigarh