Disposed

Asem Vashist v. Ut of Chandigarh

Punjab & Haryana HC6 Oct 2010CRM-M/29090/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab & Haryana granted exemption from personal appearance to a petitioner facing trial for cheating and forgery allegations, allowing representation by counsel subject to specific conditions to prevent trial delay.

What did the court decide?

Exemption from personal appearance in trial, subject to counsel representation and specific conditions to prevent delay and allow recording of evidence in absence.

Asem Vashist Vs Ut of Chandigarh — Cheating and Forgery | Punjab & Haryana HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Crl.M.No. M-29090/2010(O&M) Date of decision: 6.10.2010.

¶3

Aseem Vashist

¶4

....................Petitioner

¶5

¶6

State of UT Chandigarh.

¶7

.....................Respondents

¶8

Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Jaswant Singh

¶9

Present: Mr.HPS Ishar,Advocate for the petitioner.

¶10

Jaswant Singh.J.(Oral)

¶11

This petition under Section 482 Cr.PC has been filed for exemption from personal appearance in the trial Court in case FIR No.95 dated 8.5.2003 under Sections 380,420, 468, 471,120-B IPC, PS 19 as well as in all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom.

¶12

As per allegations in the FIR, the petitioner in the year 2003 appeared in +2 examination conducted by CBSE Board, New Delhi. He is alleged to have got access to his answer sheet, lying in Dev Samaj School, Sector 21, Chandigarh for the purpose of putting fictitious roll numbers, by paying money to accused persons named in the FIR and attempted unanswered questions. Subsequently the answer sheets were deposited back at Dev Samaj School, Sector 21, Chandigarh. For the said act, the petitioner was debarred by CBSE from appearing in any examination for two years. The petitioner along

¶13

with other co-accused is facing trial in the aforesaid FIR.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that identically situated co-accused have been granted exemption from personal appearance by this Court vide various orders (P.1 to P.3).

¶15

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case,this petition is disposed of with a direction that in case the petitioner moves an application before the learned trial Court to grant him exemption from personal appearance, the learned trial court may grant the same, however, subject to the conditions that (i) he will be represented through counsel, (ii) will not delay/stall the trial proceedings, (iii) will not dispute his identity as accused, (iv) will have no objection if the prosecution evidence is also recorded in his absence but in the presence of his counsel, (v) shall keep on appearing before the trial court as and when required, and (vi) and/or any other conditions which the learned trial Court may impose.

¶16

Disposed of.

¶17

(Jaswant Singh) Judge

¶18

6.10.2010 joshi

Asem Vashist v. Ut of Chandigarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Asem Vashist v. Ut of Chandigarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gurdeep Singh @ Deepa Vs State of Punjab

Kalu Vs State of Haryana

S.K. Sood and Anr. Vs State of Haryana

Kirtan Bala and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Akshay Gupta Vs State of Punjab

Mala Kaushik Vs Ut of Chandigarh and Anr.