VINEET HANDA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has approached this Court invoking its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'Cr.P.C.') for quashing of FIR No. 32 dated 06.02.2008 under Sections 420/406/409/415/468/471/34/120-B IPC, (hereinafter referred to as 'FIR No. 32'), registered at Police Station DLF Phase II, Gurgaon and also for quashing of the order dated 08.03.2011(Annexure P-3) passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurgaon, vide which the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurgaon, declined to accept the cancellation report dated 17.01.2009 filed by the investigating agency in FIR No. 32, noted above.

(2.) The sole contention raised by learned counsel for the petitioner is that the impugned order dated 08.03.2011 (Annexure P-3) is liable to be stayed on the basis of parity as the impugned order has been stayed by this Court vide order dated 18.07.2011 passed in Criminal Misc.- M No. 21409 of 2011 because the impugned order dated 08.03.2011 (Annexure P-3) passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurgaon, was a composite one vide which he declined to accept the cancellation report.

(3.) During the course of hearing, when confronted with the order dated 18.04.2011 passed by this Court in the earlier petition filed by the petitioner bearing Criminal Misc.-M No. 10651 of 2011, as to how the instant petition was maintainable, learned counsel for the petitioner had no answer. Faced with this situation, learned counsel for the petitioner, instead of seeking immediate withdrawal of the present petition, tried to justify its filing for the second time contending that by way of instant petition, the petitioner is also seeking quashing of the FIR No. 32 in addition to seeking quashing of the impugned order dated 08.03.2011 (Annexure P-3).