Allowed

Raj Kumar v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC24 Sept 2024CRM-A/229/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted leave to appeal against a judgment of acquittal in a criminal case. The State of Punjab was deleted as an unnecessary party from the main appeal. Pendency of the lower court judgment was declared inconsequential, and the appeal was admitted for final hearing.

What did the court decide?

Leave to appeal granted; State of Punjab deleted from array of parties in main appeal; main appeal admitted.

Raj Kumar Vs State of Punjab and Anr. — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

CRM-A-229-2021 1

¶2

231 CRM-A-229-2021 RAJ KUMAR V/S STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR *** Present: Mr. Jagdish Singh Mahal, Advocate for the applicant-appellant.

¶3

Mr. Sukhdev Singh, A.A.G., Punjab.

¶4

¶5

Mr. Mohan Singla, Advocate has put in appearance and has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent No.2 in Court today which is taken on record.

¶6

State counsel submits that State of Punjab is unnecessary party and prayed for deletion of same from the array of parties.

¶7

As such, State is deleted from memo of parties.

¶8

Registry to make necessary corrections in this regard.

¶9

Counsel appearing for the applicant-appellant submits that the present application was filed against acquittal in the year 2020 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

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

¶16

CRM-A-229-2021 2

¶17

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

¶18

Main appeal

¶19

Admit.

¶20

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

¶21

said category.

¶22

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

¶23

inconsequential in any manner whatsoever.

¶24

(Anoop Chitkara) Judge

¶25

24.09.2024 Sonia Puri

¶26

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

Raj Kumar v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Kumar v. State of Punjab and Anr.

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

Geeta Kumari and Anr. Vs State of Haryana and Others

Rakesh Kumar Vs Rakesh Kumar and Ors.

Ravi Pal Singh Vs State of Punjab and Another