Allowed

Manohar Lal v. M/S Om Parkash Singla

Punjab & Haryana HC13 Dec 2012CRM-M/29252/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a habeas corpus style application under Section 138 NI Act, the Court set aside an order denying the petitioner cross-examination opportunity.准许ing the petitioner to cross-examine the complainant upon meeting cost conditions.

What did the court decide?

Order dated August 22, 2012.set aside.Petitioner permitted to cross-examine complainant on December 14,2012 subject to payment of Rs.25000/-

Manohar Lal Vs M/S Om Parkash Singla — Cheque Dishonour | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

CRM M-29252 of 2012 (O&M) [1]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶3

Crl. Misc. No. 74953 of 2012 and CRM M-29252 of 2012 (O&M)

¶4

Date of Decision: December 13, 2012

Manohar Lal

…..Petitioner

Vs.

M/s Om Parkash Singla and others

¶9

…..Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI.

¶11

-.-

¶12

Present:Mr. Rajiv Kataria, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶13

-.-

¶14

M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL)

¶15

This is a misc. application for staying the further proceedings in a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act pending against the petitioner as complaint No. 967/2 dated June 9, 2009 on the ground that the petitioner has deposited the interim cost of Rs.25000/- with the Registry and that the petitioner is not being permitted to cross-examine the complainant.

¶16

CRM M-29252 of 2012 (O&M) [2]

¶17

Counsel for the complainant Mr. Mohit Garg, has intervened at this stage and stated that next date of hearing before the trial Court is December 14, 2012 and that the complainant will be present in the trial Court on December 14, 2012. The petitioner can cross-examine the complainant.

¶18

In view of the said offer, the date of hearing is preponed from February 13, 2013 to December 13, 2012 and the petition is taken up for final hearing.

¶19

Vide impugned order dated August 22, 2012, JMIC, Panchkula has declined an opportunity to the petitioner to cross-examine the complainant by re-summoning him in proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act taking into consideration the conduct of the petitioner who had tried to evade the cross-examination of the complainant on number of dates of hearing.

¶20

Though the order does not appear to be illegal or improper, but in view of the offer of the complainant to appear in the Court for crossexamination subject to payment of compensation, this petition can be allowed.

¶21

In view of the offer made by the complainant, this petition can be finally disposed of. The order dated August 22, 2012 denying an opportunity to the petitioner to cross-examine complainant Krishan Kumar is set aside in Crl. Complaint No.967/2 dated June 9, 2009 pending in the Court of Ms.Anudeep Kaur Bhatti, JMIC, Panchkula. The complainant

¶22

CRM M-29252 of 2012 (O&M) [3]

¶23

Krishan Kumar is directed to appear before the trial Court on December 14, 2012 for cross-examination. The petitioner will be permitted to crossexamine Krishan Kumar on December 14, 2012 subject to the payment of cost of Rs.25000/-. The cost deposited by the petitioner before the Registry pursuant to the interim orders passed by this Court, would be released to the complainant or his counsel on an application being filed to the Registrar (Judicial). The trial Court will proceed with the abovesaid complaint in accordance with law thereafter.

¶24

Disposed of.

¶25

Copy of the order be given dasti to the counsel for the petitioner under the signatures of the Reader.

¶26

It is made clear that this order is meant only for criminal

¶27

complaint No.967/2 dated June 9, 2009.

¶28

December 13 , 2012 (M.M.S.BEDI) sanjay JUDGE

Manohar Lal v. M/S Om Parkash Singla

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manohar Lal v. M/S Om Parkash Singla

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

Ranjit Singh Vs State of Punjab

Bhushan @ Brij Bhushan Vs State of Haryana

Umar Moha. Vs State of Haryana

Jarnail Singh @ Shinder Vs State of Punjab

Harpreet Singh @ Manga @ Ghora and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Lala & Anr. Vs State of Haryana