Disposed

Ghansham v. Rakesh Kumar

Punjab & Haryana HC24 Sept 2024CRM-A/2100/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application for leave to appeal against a 2016 acquittal. The court granted leave to appeal and admitted the main appeal for hearing per the roster. On the respondent's undertaking to comply with orders if the acquittal is reversed, exemption from furnishing bail or surety bonds was granted.

What did the court decide?

Leave to appeal granted; main appeal admitted; respondents exempted from furnishing bail/surety bonds; pendency declared inconsequential for the respondent.

Ghansham Vs Rakesh Kumar — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

CRM-A-2100-MA-2016 1

¶2

226 CRM-A-2100-MA-2016

¶3

GHANSHAM V/S RAKESH KUMAR

¶4

¶5

Present: Mr. Viney Saini, Advocate for the appellant.

¶6

Mr. G.C. Shahpuri, Advocate for the respondent.

¶7

***

¶8

Counsel appearing for the applicants-appellant submits that the present

¶9

application was filed against acquittal in the year 2016 and they have a very good case on merit.

¶10

On the contrary, respondent’s counsel submits that the judgment of acquittal is well reasoned and leave to appeal should not be granted. He further submits that in case, this Court grants leave to appeal and admits the main appeal, its turn will not come for hearing for decades, as such pendency of the appeal may be treated inconsequential for the respondent.

¶11

Leave to appeal is granted.

¶12

Counsel for the respondent further submits that he be exempted from furnishing bail bonds/ surety bonds before the concerned trial Court or Chief Judicial Magistrate. He undertakes to comply with the orders if the judgment of acquittal is reversed and he would comply with the directions passed by the Court.

¶13

Given such undertaking, there shall be no need to furnish bail bonds/ surety bonds by the respondents.

¶14

There would be no need for a certified copy of this order for furnishing bonds, and any Advocate for the accused can download this order along with case status from the official web page of this Court and attest it to be a true copy. In case the attesting officer wants to verify the authenticity, such an officer can also verify its authenticity and may download and use the downloaded copy for attesting bonds.

¶15

Registry to communicate this order to the trial Court without any delay.

¶16

Sonia Puri 2024.09.24 16:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶17

CRM-A-2100-MA-2016 2 Main appeal

¶18

Admit.

¶19

List for final hearing on its own turn as per queue following the roster.

¶20

It is clarified that pendency of the present appeal before this Court shall be

¶21

inconsequential in any manner whatsoever.

¶22

(Anoop Chitkara) Judge

¶23

24.09.2024 Sonia Puri

¶24

Sonia Puri 2024.09.24 16:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Ghansham v. Rakesh Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ghansham v. Rakesh Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Goldy and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Joginder Singh Vs Harpreet Singh

Pardeep Kumar Vs the State of Punjab and Others

Balbir Chand Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Manish Verma @ Banta Vs Union of India

Itwinder Singh Vs Davinder Singh