Disposed
M/S Rattan Professional Edu. Soc. v. Ut of Chandigarh and Ors.
Punjab & Haryana HCCRM-M/20185/2011
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH…
What the court decided
AI extract
COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH…
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc. No.M-20185 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision : October 15, 2012
Bihari Lal
...Petitioner
Versus
Union Territory, Chandigarh
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI
Present: Mr.Arun Bansal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Preet Pal Singh, Advocate, for UT, Chandhigarh.
Naresh Kumar Sanghi, J.
Prayer in this petition is for release of registration certificate of the vehicle bearing No.HR10-E-0030 to its registered owner during the pendency of the trial.
Two vehicles had collided and the drivers of both the said vehicles are facing trial for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 337 and 338, IPC before the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Chandigarh. During the pendency of the said trial, an application was moved by the petitioner for release of the registration certificate mentioned herein above.
Keeping in view the totality of the circumstances of the case, learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Chandigarh, is directed to release the registration certificate of vehicle No. HR10-E-0030 to its registered owner on supardari during the pendency of the trial subject to his furnishing supardarinama in the sum of Rs.20,000/- with one surety in the like amount in accordance with law.
Disposed of
October 15, 2012 seema
(Naresh Kumar Sanghi) Judge
Bihari Lal
Union Territory, Chandigarh
Naresh Kumar Sanghi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court