Petitioner filed PIL under Cr.P.C. s. 482 seeking quashing of an order permitting a witness to prove a receipt. High Court found order correct and lawfully passed, holding no miscarriage of justice and dismissing petition.
Petition for quashing order dated 17.12.2015 dismissed with no merit found.
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.
127 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM No.M-4317 of 2016 (O&M) Date of Decision: February 08, 2016
Sampati
...Petitioner
VERSUS
Sh.Ashwani Kumar
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH
Present: Mr.Kapil Khanna, Advocate for the petitioner.
INDERJIT SINGH, J.
Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of order dated 17.12.2015 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jalandhar and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the record.
From the record, I find that an application was filed by the complainant for examining the witness namely Harbans Lal to prove the receipt Ex.C1, which was attested by Harbans Lal. Learned JMIC, Jalandhar, after considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also after hearing the parties, allowed the application, vide order dated 17.12.2015.
VINEET GULATI 2016.02.11 15:38 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
CRM No.M-4317 of 2016
-2-
From the record, it is clear that the evidence of the complainant is still going on. Harbans Lal is attesting witness of receipt Ex.C1 and the complainant wants to examine him to prove the said receipt. Learned JMIC, Jalandhar, held that said witness is material for deciding the case. It is settled law that if any evidence is essential or necessary for the just decision of the case, the witness can be called. The mere fact that the name of Harbans Lal is not mentioned in the list of witnesses, is no ground to dismiss the application.
The perusal of the order dated 17.12.2015 shows that it has been passed by learned JMIC, Jalandhar correctly, as per law and it does not require any interference from this Court. In no way, the impugned order can be held as illegal nor it amounts to miscarriage of justice.
Therefore, finding no merit in the present petition, the same is dismissed.
February 08, 2016 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE
VINEET GULATI 2016.02.11 15:38 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the order permitting examination of a witness to prove a receipt under Cr.P.C. s. 482 requires interference by this Court.
Whether the impugned order amounts to any illegal discretion or miscarriage of justice.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sampati
Sh. Ashwani Kumar
Inderjit Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
