Limitation Act | Litigant Cannot Be Punished For Court's Own Docket Load: J&K High Court Illicit Affair Alone Cannot Make a Man Guilty of Abetting Suicide: Supreme Court Quashes Charge Under Section 306 IPC Landlord Cannot Be Punished for Slowness of Courts: Supreme Court on Bonafide Need in Eviction Suits Expect States To Enact Laws Regulating Unlicensed Money Lenders Charging Exorbitant Interest Contrary To 'Damdupat': Supreme Court Accused Who Skips Lok Adalat After Seeking It, Then Cries 'Prejudice', Cannot Claim Apprehension of Denial of Justice: Madras High Court Refuse To Transfer Case IO Cannot Act Without Prior Sanction: Gujarat High Court Grants Bail, Flags Procedural Lapse in Religious Conversion Case Electricity Board Strictly Liable For Unprotected Transformer, 7-Year-Old Cannot Be Guilty Of Contributory Negligence: Allahabad High Court POCSO Conviction Can't Stand For Offence Not Charged: Delhi High Court Member of Unlawful Assembly Cannot Escape Conviction By Claiming He Only Carried a Lathi and Struck No One: Allahabad High Court Jurisdiction Cannot Be Founded On Casual Or Incidental Facts If Not Have A Direct Nexus With The Lis: : Delhi High Court Clause Stating Disputes "Can" Be Settled By Arbitration Is Not A Binding Arbitration Agreement: Supreme Court State Cannot Plead Helplessness Against Sand Mafia; Supreme Court Warns Of Paramilitary Deployment, Complete Mining Ban In MP & Rajasthan Authority Cannot Withdraw Subsidy Citing Non-Compliance When It Ignored Repeated Requests For Inspection: Supreme Court Out-of-State SC/ST/OBC Candidates Cannot Claim Rajasthan's Reservation Benefits in NEET PG Counselling: Rajasthan High Court Supreme Court Upholds Haryana's Regularisation Of Qualified Ad Hoc Staff As 'One-Time Measure', Strikes Down Futuristic Cut-Offs

"Court Quashes FIR Against Sukhbir Singh Badal, Observes 'No Evidence to Support Charges'"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Punjab & Haryana High Court has quashed the FIR against Sukhbir Singh Badal, a well-known political leader and President of Shiromani Akali Dal. The Court observed that there was "no evidence to support charges" under various sections of the IPC and the Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897.

Background

Sukhbir Singh Badal was accused of obstructing legal mining operations and threatening the staff of M/s Friends and Company. The FIR was registered under multiple sections, including 269, 270, 188, 341, 506 IPC 1860, and Section 3 of the Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897. Badal argued that the FIR was politically motivated and that he had visited the site to investigate complaints of illegal mining.

The Court noted that the petitioner, a well-known political personality, had visited the mining site to verify complaints about illegal mining. "The Court found no evidence to support the charges under Sections 269, 270, 188, 341, 506 IPC, and Section 3 of the Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897," the judgement read.

The Court highlighted the lack of evidence gathered by the prosecution. "Prosecution fails to gather any evidence of disobedience or wrongful restraint by the petitioner," the Court observed.

The Court also noted that Badal's visit to the site could not be considered a violation of any promulgation issued under the Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897, or the Disaster Management Act, 2006.

Given the lack of evidence and the peculiar facts and circumstances, the Court invoked its inherent jurisdiction under section 482 CrPC and quashed the FIR and all subsequent proceedings. "Given above, in the peculiar facts and circumstances, it is a fit case where the continuation of criminal proceedings shall amount to an abuse of the process of law," the judgement concluded.

 

D.D- August 24, 2023

Sukhbir Singh Badal vs State of Punjab and another                    

Latest Legal News