Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2026 DAILYLAW 33787 (PNJ)

DEEPESH @ DEEPU v. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

CRM-M/40973/2026 · 2026-07-27

Surya Partap Singh

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

129 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh Criminal Misc. No. M-40973 of 2026 Date of Decision: 27.07.2026 Deepesh alias Deepu ... Petitioner(s) Versus State of Haryana and Others ... Respondent(s) CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Surya Partap Singh. Present: Mr. Gurinder Singh Dhillon, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mr. Ramender Singh Chauhan, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. Surya Partap Singh, J. 1. The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner for directions to transfer investigation of a case arising out of FIR No.181 dated 17.06.2026, for the commission of offence(s) punishable under Sections 109(1), 3(5), 125, 121(1), 132 & 221 of ‘the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023’ and Section 25 of ‘the Arms Act, 1959’, Police Station Chandimandir, District Panchkula, Haryana. 2. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner would be satisfied if a direction is issued to the respondent No.2-Director General of Police, Haryana to treat this petition as a representation of the petitioner and decide the same within the stipulated time. 3. Notice of motion. 4. Since advance notice has already been served upon the State, DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 2026.07.27 18:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Criminal Misc. No. M-40973 of 2026 2 Mr. Ramender Singh Chauhan, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. Hence, service of notice upon the respondents is hereby dispensed with. 5. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and in the interest of justice, the present petition is hereby disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.2 to treat this petition as a representation of the petitioner and decide the same by passing a speaking order within a period of one week from the date of receipt of copy of instant order. It is however clarified that no finding is being returned, by this Court, with regard to merits of the contents of petition. The respondent No.2 shall be at liberty to make an independent assessment with regard to contents of the petition, and take an independent decision at his own level. (Surya Partap Singh) Judge July 27, 2026 “DK” Whether speaking/reasoned :Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 2026.07.27 18:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document