Chander Mukhi Bhargav v. State of Haryana
Case brief
What is this about?
This petition sought modification of an order under Cr.P.C. Section 438 directing the accused to retain the trial draft. The High Court modified the order to deposit the draft as a fixed deposit in a nationalised bank for the complainant, payable upon trial conclusion with interest.
What did the court decide?
The draft in the name of the complainant be deposited with a Nationalised Bank as a Fixed Deposit to be disbursed on conclusion of trial along with interest.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc. No. M-8176 of 2009 (O/M). Date of Decision : August 04, 2009.
Chander Mukhi Bhargav wife of Hari Jiwan Lal Bhargav resident of House No. 333/16, Friends Colony, Gurgaon, Haryana. ...... Petitioner .
Versus.
State of Haryana, and others.
..... Respondents.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH.
Present:Mr. Rajesh Arora, Advocate, for the petitioner .
Mr. Yash Pal Malik, A.A.G. Haryana, for the respondent-State.
AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL).
The prayer made by the petitioner in the present petition is for modification of order dated 23.01.2009, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Gurgaon, while entertaining application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. of respondents No. 2 and 3, wherein the Court below has observed that the draft, which was prepared by Shiv Lal be kept on the file of the Trial Court and shall be handed over to the complainant after final decision of the case.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the order directing the accused to keep the trial draft with the trial court be modified to deposit it as a fixed deposit in a nationalised bank in the name of the complainant?
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Chander Mukhi Bhargav
- respondent
State of Haryana
Coram
Augustine George Masih
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Punjab & Haryana HC
- Decided on
- · August
- Registered
- Case no.
- CRM-M/8176/2009
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court