SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(P&H) 1984

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
SANDEEP MOUDGIL
Rasneet Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Surinder Garg, Advocate

JUDGMENT :

Sandeep Moudgil, J (Oral) 

The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked under Section 482 Cr.P.C., for setting aside the order dated 26.08.2016 (Annexure P-9) passed in FIR No.79 dated 26.07.2014, under Sections 325, 323, 34 of IPC, registered at Police Station Bajakhana, District Faridkot (Annexure P-1), whereby the petitioner has been declared as proclaimed person.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the order dated 26.08.2016 (Annexure P-9), vide which the petitioner has been declared as proclaimed person suffers from material illegality, since mandatory period of 30 days has not been rightly calculated by the trial Court in utter violation to the mandate laid down under Section 82 of Cr.P.C.

3. Notice of motion.

4. Mr. Rajiv Verma, DAG Punjab accepts notice on behalf of respondent/State, whereas Mr. Lovish Arora, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of respondent No.2/complainant. Both are ad idem to submit that the order dated 26.08.2016 (Annexure P-9) suffers from technical flow, since the period of 30 days has not been rightly calculated as per established formula i.e. 30 days' period has to be completed from the date when proclamation is effecte

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top