Disposed

Pritam Singh v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC6 Jul 2009CRM-M/13489/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court reduced the fine imposed on the petitioner from Rs.50,000 to Rs.10,000, deeming the original amount excessive due to the vehicle being seized by the finance company, allowing one month to deposit the reduced amount without affecting recovery proceedings for the original fine.

What did the court decide?

Fine reduced to Rs.10,000 payable within one month; failure to pay dismisses petition, original recovery unaffected.

Pritam Singh Vs State of Punjab — Punjab & Haryana HC (2009) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

**Crl. Misc. No. 13489-M of 2008 Date of Decision: 6.7.2009 *****

Pritam Singh

.. Petitioner

Vs.

State of Punjab.

.. Respondent.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR,

¶10

Present:Mr. D.S. Gurna, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶11

**Mr. B.S. Sra, Addl. A.G. Punjab *****

¶12

ARVIND KUMAR, J.

¶13

The petitioner took Canter No. RJ02G-5400 on superdari with the undertaking to produce it before the Court as and when directed, but failed to produce the same before the Court on 13.9.2005 as a consequence thereof the trial court while forfeiting the superdari bond slapped the fine of Rs.50,000/- upon him vide order dated 22.8.2006. The appeal preferred by the petitioner before the Court below was dismissed, leading to the institution of the present petition.

¶14

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the case file carefully.

¶15

It has come on record that although the vehicle in question was not produced before the Court on stipulated date but later on it was produced before the court on 16.5.2006. Learned counsel for the petitioner has confined his prayer to the extent that the amount of fine, as imposed, be reduced keeping in view the fact that the vehicle in question could not be produced before the Court due to the fact that it was seized by the finance company due to non-payment of installment of loan amount.

¶16

In this view of the matter, the fine of Rs.50,000/- seems to be on higher side and is accordingly reduced to Rs.10,000/-, which shall be deposited by him with a period of one month. In case of failure on the part

¶17

¶18

of the petitioner to deposit the fine amount, the instant petitioner shall be deemed to have been dismissed, without there being any effect on the recovery proceedings of the original amount of Rs.50,000/- initiated against the petitioner.

¶19

With the above modification, the instant petition stands disposed of.

¶20

(ARVIND KUMAR) JUDGE

¶21

July 6,2009 Jiten

Pritam Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pritam Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sewa Singh and Ors. Vs Gurmeet Kaur

Ramesh Sodhi Vs Vimal Kapoor

Teja Singh Vs Bimla Devi

M/S Metro Rim India Pvt. Ltd. & Others Vs M/S Steel Strips Limited & Another

Sajjan Singh Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Ram Chander Vs State of Haryana