SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Paramjit Singh vs State Of Punjab on 9 February, 2018

207 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH

Criminal Misc. No. M- 13326 of 2017 (OM)
Date of decision : February 09, 2018

Paramjit Singh …..Petitioner

Versus
State of Punjab and another ….Respondents

CORAM:- HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL

Present: Mr. Krishan Sehajpal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Monika Jalota, DAG, Punjab.

Ms. Amandeep Sibia, Advocate for respondent No. 2.

***
LISA GILL, J.

Prayer in this petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to the

petitioner in FIR No. 10 dated 23.02.2017 under Sections 406/498A/323

IPC registered at Police Station Women Cell Jalandhar.

The petitioner as well as respondent No. 2 were directed to

remain present in Court on 10.10.2017. It was submitted by learned counsel

for the petitioner on the said date that due to miscommunication by his

office, the petitioner could not come present. The matter was adjourned

twice on his request. Following order was passed on the last date of

hearing:-

” Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that one last
opportunity be afforded to the petitioner to come present in
terms of the earlier orders of this Court. It is due to unavoidable
circumstances that the petitioner is not present in Court today.

Respondent No.2 is present in Court.

In the interest of justice, adjourned to 09.02.2018 subject
to `5,000/- costs to be paid to respondent No.2 on the next date
of hearing.

1 of 2
11-02-2018 21:45:18 :::
Criminal Misc. No. M- 13326 of 2017 (OM) -2-

It is made clear that in case the petitioner is not present
in Court on the next date of hearing, this petition may be
dismissed on this ground itself.”

Today again, the petitioner is not present in Court and costs of

`5,000/- have not been paid to respondent No. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner is unable to explain the

absence of the petitioner or non-payment of costs.

Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 submits that in fact the

petitioner has gone abroad and this is the reason why he is not appearing

before this Court.

Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Jagjit

Singh, informs that after joining investigation on 26.04.2017, the petitioner

has not joined investigation.

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

petition is dismissed.

(Lisa Gill)
February 09, 2018 Judge
rts
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No

Whether reportable : Yes/No

2 of 2
11-02-2018 21:45:19 :::

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2020 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation