KAMLA @ PUSHPA vs STATE OF HARYANA Advocate - A.G. HARYANA — CRR/2653/2023

Case under Indian Penal Code Section 302, 34 IPC. Disposed: --ALLOWED on 14th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC011486332023

Filing Number

CRR/88604/2023

Filing Date

15-Nov-2023

Registration No

CRR/2653/2023

Registration Date

15-Nov-2023

Judge

Mr. Justice N.S. Shekhawat

Coram

Mr. Justice N.S. Shekhawat

Bench Type

Single

Category

99 ( 945 )

Sub-Category

37.6 - PROCEEDINGS STAYED IN CRIMINAL REVISION ( 196 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

14-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--ALLOWED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code Section 302, 34 IPC

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.KAMLA @ PUSHPA

    Adv. PANKAJ NANHERA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF HARYANA Advocate - A.G. HARYANA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-May-2026

    Mr. Justice N.S. ShekhawatView PDF

    Case Summary: CRR/2653/2023 Decision: The High Court of Punjab and Haryana allowed Kamla's revision petition, set aside the trial court's closure of prosecution evidence, and ordered the re-examination of two eyewitnesses with CCTV footage to establish the accused's identity in this murder case (FIR No. 518 under IPC Sections 302 and 341). Key Reasoning: The court found the Public Prosecutor's conduct improper when he refused to examine the recalled witnesses on 26.10.2023, despite the court's prior approval of the Section 311 CrPC application to re-call them on 12.10.2023. The court emphasized that the Public Prosecutor has a legal duty to place the best evidence before the trial court to ensure justice and prevent miscarriage of justice. The court also directed appointment of a new Public Prosecutor for the case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 15-Nov-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRR/2653/2023

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CRR/2653/2023 Decision: The High Court of Punjab and Haryana allowed Kamla's revision petition, set aside the trial court's closure of prosecution evidence, and ordered the re-examination of two eyewitnesses with CCTV footage to establish the accused's identity in this murder case (FIR No. 518 under IPC Sections 302 and 341). Key Reasoning: The court found the Public Prosecutor's conduct improper when he refused to examine the recalled witnesses on 26.10.2023, despite the court's prior approval of the Section 311 CrPC application to re-call them on 12.10.2023. The court emphasized that the Public Prosecutor has a legal duty to place the best evidence before the trial court to ensure justice and prevent miscarriage of justice. The court also directed appointment of a new Public Prosecutor for the case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case