Dismissed

Jasbir Kaur v. U.T Administration Chandigarh & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC13 Aug 2015CRM-M/12123/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous petition under Section 482 CrPC, Jasbir Kaur challenged the dismissal of her complaint regarding her brother's murder. The trial court dismissed the complaint in default as the petitioner failed to appear for arguments on the listed date. The High Court rejected the petition, holding no grounds for interference.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner's petition for quashing the order of dismissal in default was dismissed.

Jasbir Kaur Vs U.T Administrat… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Punjab & Haryana HC (2015)

¶1

-1-

¶2

Crl. Misc.-M No. 12123 of 2015

¶3

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh

¶4

Crl. Misc.-M No. 12123 of 2015 Date of Decision: 13.8.2015.

Jasbir Kaur

.....Petitioner

Versus

Union Territory, Chandigarh and others

¶9

.....Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA

¶11

Present: Mr. Ashu Kaushik, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

¶13

SABINA, J.

¶14

Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 challenging the order dated 12.11.2014 (Annexure P-3).

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that absence of the petitioner before the Trial Court on 18.4.2014 was not intentional. In fact, petitioner had noted down a wrong date. When the petitioner visited the Court on 16.5.2014, she came to know that the complaint had been dismissed on 18.4.2014.

¶16

Petitioner had filed a complaint regarding murder of her brother Puran Singh. A perusal of the order dated 12.11.2014 (Annexure P-3) reveals that petitioner was granted 54 opportunities to enable her to complete her evidence. However, evidence of the petitioner was closed vide order dated 16.4.2014 and the case was adjourned to 18.4.2014 for arguments. However, on 18.4.2014, none appeared on behalf of the petitioner.

¶17

GURPREET SINGH 2015.08.14 15:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶18

-2-

¶19

Crl. Misc.-M No. 12123 of 2015

¶20

The Trial Court passed the following order on

¶21

18.4.2014:-

¶22

“Case called several times since morning but neither the complainant nor anybody has appeared on his behalf. It is already 3.50 P.M. It appears that the complainant is not interested in pursuing the complaint further. As such, complaint is dismissed in default. File be consigned to the record room .”

¶23

Since the case was listed for arguments on 18.4.2014, presence of the petitioner was necessary. However, petitioner failed to appear before the Trial Court on 18.4.2014 and left with no other alternative, the Trial Court dismissed the complaint in default.

¶24

Hence, no ground for interference by this Court is made

out.

Dismissed.

(SABINA) JUDGE

August 13, 2015 Gurpreet

¶29

GURPREET SINGH 2015.08.14 15:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Jasbir Kaur v. U.T Administration Chandigarh & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jasbir Kaur v. U.T Administration Chandigarh & Ors.

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

Joginder Kaur Vs State of Punjab

Seema & Anr. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Sukhwinder Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Chet Ram and Anr. Vs Balbir Singh

Rajinder Kaur Matharu and Anr. Vs Ut of Chandigarh and Anr.

Harjit Singh Vs State of Punjab