Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2026 DAILYLAW 12219 (PNJ)

RANJIT SINGH v. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER

CRR/767/2026 · 2026-04-22

Anoop Chitkara

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRR-767-2026 209 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRR-767-2026 Date of Decision: 22.04.2026 Ranjit Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and another …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present: Mr. Namit Khurana, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Shiva Khurmi, D.A.G., Haryana. Mr. Samay Singh Sandhawalia, Advocate and Mr. Divyansh Som Garg, Advocate for respondent No.2. **** ANOOP CHITKARA, J. 1. Seeking setting aside of order dated 19.02.2025 passed by Principal Magistrate Juvenile Justice Board, Yamuna Nagar, the petitioner has come up before this Court by filing the present revision petition. 2. On 17.04.2026, counsel for respondent No.2 has raised an objection about maintainability of the present petition. 3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that there are powers of High Court to take up the revisional jurisdiction. To this, counsel for respondent No.2 submits that the extraordinary powers are not over the revisional jurisdiction under Section 397/401 CrPC. Needless to say that the order in question is not interlocutory but final. 4. Counsel for respondent No.2 submits that there is a specific remedy of revision before the Sessions Court. Instead of exercising such remedy, the petitioner has come up before this Court. Petitioner may forfeit his right to second agitation by coming to this Court but petitioner has no right to encroach the rights of the respondent to review their order from the High Court, as such in these circumstances, the appropriate Court is the Sessions Court. 5. Given above, the present revision petition is dismissed with liberty to file fresh before the Sessions Court. The time for which the present revision petition was pending 1 JYOTI SHARMA 2026.04.23 16:13 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Sector 1, Chandigarh CRR-767-2026 before this Court shall not be counted for the purpose of limitation. It is clarified that the respondent No.2 shall not raise any objection in case the revision is filed within 30 days from today. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 22.04.2026 Jyoti Sharma Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: No. 2 JYOTI SHARMA 2026.04.23 16:13 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Sector 1, Chandigarh