Richa Sharma vs State Of Haryana And Another on 20 September, 2017

CRM No.M-34089 of 2017 [1]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH

Criminal Misc. No.M- 34089 of 2017(OM)
Date of Decision: September 20 , 2017.

Richa Sharma …… PETITIONER (s)

Versus

State of Haryana and another …… RESPONDENT (s)

CORAM:- HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE LISA GILL

Present: Mr. O.P.Goyal, Senior Advocate with
Ms. Ritika Gupta, Advocate
for the petitioner.

Mr. Anmol Malik, AAG, Haryana.

Mr. Vinod S.Bhardwaj, Advocate
for respondent No.2.
*****

LISA GILL, J.

Prayer in this petition is for setting aside order dated 28.08.2017

(Annexure P5) passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Jhajjar

whereby permission has been granted to respondent No.2 to travel/visit Toronto

(Canada) from 22.09.2017 till 29.09.2017 and Montreal (Canada) from

06.10.2017 to 15.10.2017.

Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that permission has

been afforded to respondent No.2 by the learned trial court in a totally unjustified

manner without imposing any kind of conditions for securing the presence of

respondent No.2 in the proceedings arising out of FIR No.0058 dated 18.04.2017

1 of 3
23-09-2017 23:54:27 :::
CRM No.M-34089 of 2017 [2]

under Sections 498A/506 IPC Police Station Women Cell, Jhajjar. Stringent

conditions should have been imposed before permitting the petitioner to leave the

country.

Mr. Vinod S.Bhardwaj, Advocate appears on behalf of respondent

No.2 and files his power of attorney. The same is taken on record subject to just

exceptions.

Learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that his client is

willing to abide by any conditions which may be imposed by this Court as

respondent No.2 is admittedly working as Assistant Professor with the LNM

Institute of Information Technology, Jaipur (Rajasthan). Respondent No.2 has

sought permission to visit Toronto and Montreal (Canada) only for the purpose of

attending two conferences which are to be held in Canada.. He is working at the

abovesaid institute and shall be returning to attend his duties after 15.10.2017.

Respondent No.2, it is submitted, undertakes to deposit a sum of `7,00,000/-

before the learned trial court which may be released to the petitioner

unconditionally in case respondent No.2 does not come back to India on the

designated date as per his undertaking.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, the present

petition is disposed of with a modification in order dated 28.08.2017 (Annexure

P5) passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Jhajjar to the extent that

permission is afforded to respondent No.2 to visit Toronto (Canada) from

22.09.2017 till 29.09.2017 and Montreal (Canada) from 06.10.2017 to

15.10.2017, subject to deposit of `7,00,000/- before the learned trial court as well

as surety to the tune of `3,00,000/-.

2 of 3
23-09-2017 23:54:28 :::
CRM No.M-34089 of 2017 [3]

The said amount of `7,00,000/- shall be released to the petitioner, in

case respondent No.2 does not return to India on the designated date. This

amount shall not count towards any kind of claim which the petitioner may have

against respondent No.2. The said amount shall be returned to respondent No.2

in case he returns to India in terms of the order.

( LISA GILL )
September 20 , 2017. JUDGE
‘om’

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No

3 of 3
23-09-2017 23:54:28 :::

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *