121 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-6275-2025 DECIDED ON: 21.05.2025 DALBIR SINGH AND ORS .....PETITIONERS VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER .....RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL Present: Mr. Gurinder Singh, Advocate for Mr. Tejinder Kataria, Advocate for the petitioners Mr. Jasjit Singh Rattu, DAG Punjab. SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL) This petition was preferred for quashing of FIR No.0086 dated 30.06.2019 (Annexure P-1) under Sections 324, 341, 323, 148, 149 of IPC registered at Police Station Makhu, District Ferozepur, on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-2). The petition was listed for hearing in the urgent list for the first time on 03.02.2025; however, it was adjourned at the request of the petitioner. On the next date of hearing, i.e., 17.02.2025, a similar request for adjournment was made on behalf of the petitioner, and the matter was consequently deferred to 20.02.2025. On 20.02.2025 as well, Mr. Anuj Chauhan, Advocate, appeared on behalf of Mr. Tejinder Kataria, Advocate, and sought an adjournment. Accordingly, the matter was further adjourned to 04.04.2025. MEENU 2025.05.22 08:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-6275-2025 -2- This Court during the Court of hearing on 04.04.2025 passed the following order, which was apprised to the Court that petitioner has been declared proclaimed person but said proceedings stands set aside for which a copy of that order was to be produced. “The State counsel apprised the Court that earlier the petitioners were declaried as proclaimed persons and further one of the victims Harpreet Singh is not impleaded as a party to the present petition. Counsel for the petitioners apprised the Court that order whereby the petitioners were declared as proclaimed person is already set aside and he prays for time to produce the copy of the said order and further to implead another victim namely Harpreet Singh as repondent No.3 in the present petition. Needful be done by the next date of hearing. Now be listed on 21.05.2025.” Today again a request for adjournment has been made on behalf of Mr. Tejinder Kataria, Advocate by Mr. Gurinder Singh, Advocate, which is totally unjustified and this Court do not find any plausible explanation to defer the hearing in the light of numerous circumstances as detailed hereinabove. In the light of above, I am of the considered view that petitioner is not inclined to pursue with the matter any further and the same is ordered to be dismissed for non-prosecution. (SANDEEP MOUDGIL) 21.05.2025 JUDGE Meenu Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No MEENU 2025.05.22 08:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document