Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2026 DAILYLAW 15357 (PNJ)

RAJINDER KUMAR ALIAS RAJU v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

CRM-M/8290/2026 · 2026-03-13

Surya Partap Singh

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRM-M-829 IN T 128 RAJINDE STATE OF CORAM: Present: SURYA P like to pre contained i 2. the cause ti issued to th provisions registering earlier num under the 8290-2026(O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJ CHANDIGA INDER KUMAR @RAJU VERSUS TE OF PUNJAB & ORS. AM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUR Ms. Rishma Verma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Eklavya Darshi, Deputy YA PARTAP SINGH, J (ORAL) Learned counsel for the petitio to press the present petition with ined in the petition. The abovementioned prayer re “the present petition may kin se title of the present petition and n to the respondent No.2 to 4 to follo ions of Bharatiya Nagarik Su ring/after registration of any case number of false FIRs have been the Punjab Excise Act without any 1 PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT DIGARH CRM-M-8290-2026 (O&M) DECIDED ON: 13.03.2026 .....PETITIONE RSUS .....RESPONDENT SURYA PARTAP SINGH vocate puty Advocate General, Punjab. petitioner has submitted that she wou with regard to prayer No.1 only, a ayer reads as under:- kindly be accepted as prayed for nd necessary directions may kindly b follow/comply with all the mandato Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 befo case/FIR against the petitioner, a een registered against the petition any evidence against the petitione &M) .2026 IONER DENTS e would nly, as for in dly be datory before er, as itioner tioner, VINOD KUMAR ARYA 2026.03.16 14:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-829 without an audiograph 3. Counsel ha complied w 4. Counsel, th No.1 and f  Vinod    8290-2026(O&M) t any recovery from the petitione raphy;” With regard to abovementio sel has assured that the abovementi lied with by the respondent No.2. In view of abovementioned a sel, the present petition is hereby par and for rest of the prayer the same is                  2 ioner, without any videography an mentioned prayer, the learned Sta mentioned statutory provision will b oned assurance given by learned Sta by partly allowed with regard to pray me is hereby dismissed.              y and d State will be ed State o prayer VINOD KUMAR ARYA 2026.03.16 14:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document