Rupinder Kaur Vs. State of Punjab

Rupinder Kaur vs State of Punjab

Type Court Judgment Court Punjab and Haryana Decided Sep 23, 2013

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1091845

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1091845
Court: Punjab and Haryana High Court
Decided On: Sep 23, 2013
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Rupinder Kaur

Respondent

State of Punjab

Excerpt

.....on the ground that she was present at the time of agreement reached between the complainant and co-accused ranjit singh. as per the agreement, the entire amount was paid to ranjit singh. on the other hand, the learned state counsel opposes the prayer of the petitioner and states that the petitioner is a habitual offender. shanker gauri 2013.09.24 17:35 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court chandigarh crm-m-30537-2013 2 there is another fir no.88 of 2008, wherein the similar allegations were made against the petitioner. though, she has been acquitted by the trial court on the basis of the compromise, but ranjit singh, his wife and his son have been declared as proclaimed offenders.bail application i.e.crm-m-881-2011 filed by davinder kaur and ranjit singh, the main accused stands dismissed for non-prosecution vide order dated 19.8.2011. heard. keeping in view the antecedents of the petitioner and the fact that the main accused ranjit singh has been declared as proclaimed offender, this court is not inclined to grant any discretionary relief to the petitioner. accordingly, the present petition is dismissed. 23.9.2013 (jitendra chauhan) gsv judge shanker gauri 2013.09.24 17:35 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court chandigarh

Full Judgment

CRM-M-30537-2013 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-30537-2013 Date of decision: 23.9.2013 Rupinder Kaur ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr.Vipin Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.Luvinder Sofat, AAG, Punjab assisted by ASI Harinder Singh Mr.Sandeep Arora, Advocate for the complainant **** Jitendra Chauhan, J.

(Oral) By filing the present petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner has sought pre-arrest bail in case FIR No.8 dated 13.1.2010, registered under Sections 420, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Sadar, Batala.

It is contended that the petitioner did not receive any amount.

She is being prosecuted only on the ground that she was present at the time of agreement reached between the complainant and co-accused Ranjit Singh.

As per the agreement, the entire amount was paid to Ranjit Singh.

On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the prayer of the petitioner and states that the petitioner is a habitual offender.

Shanker Gauri 2013.09.24 17:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRM-M-30537-2013 2 There is another FIR No.88 of 2008, wherein the similar allegations were made against the petitioner.

Though, she has been acquitted by the trial Court on the basis of the compromise, but Ranjit Singh, his wife and his son have been declared as proclaimed offendeRs.Bail application i.e.CRM-M-881-2011 filed by Davinder Kaur and Ranjit Singh, the main accused stands dismissed for non-prosecution vide order dated 19.8.2011.

Heard.

Keeping in view the antecedents of the petitioner and the fact that the main accused Ranjit Singh has been declared as proclaimed offender, this Court is not inclined to grant any discretionary relief to the petitioner.

Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed.

23.9.2013 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) gsv JUDGE Shanker Gauri 2013.09.24 17:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

Same Court & Year Punjab and Haryana · 2013 Same Parties Rupinder Kaur vs State of Punjab Same Subject Education