Dismissed¶49

Karam Singh v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC2 Jul 2025CRM-A/125/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh; CRM-A-125-MA-2013; Section 378(4) Cr.P.C.; special leave to appeal by complainant against acquittal; IPC Sections 419, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B; dismissal for want of prosecution; non-representation by counsel; counsel unable to contact applicant; sine die adjournment; Justice Sanjay Vashisth; decided 02.07.2025.

What did the court decide?

As counsel for the applicant expressed inability to assist the Court, the required contact with the applicant not having been established, the Court was left with no other option but to dismiss the special leave petition for want of prosecution. ¶48

Karam Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

CRM-A-125-MA-2013

¶2

- 1 -

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

135

¶5

CRM-A-125-MA-2013 Date of decision: 02.07.2025

KARAM SINGH

....Appellant

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS

¶10

...Respondents

¶11

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S ANJAY VASHISTH

¶12

Present : Ms. Chetna Thakur, Advocate for Mr. Satwant Mehta, Advocate for the appellant.

¶13

SANJAY VASHISTH. J.(Oral)

¶14

In a complaint case filed under Sections 419, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC, respondents No.2 and 3 were acquitted along with other nominated accused Raman Sharma and Dalbir Ram. Complainant-Karam Singh has filed the application for seeking Special Leave to Appeal i.e. CRM-A-125-MA-2013, under Section 378 (4) Cr.P.C and same is pending since 2013.

¶15

On 08.09.2014, following order was passed:-

¶16

“The instant petition was filed on 25.01.2013. It came up for hearing on various dates i.e. 3.04.2013, 29.05.2013, 11.11.2013, 27.01.2014 and 21.04.2014. As per the record either the counsel has not caused appearance or has sought adjournment on one ground or the other. It appears that the learned counsel has lost interest in the matter. In the circumstances, the present petition is ordered to be adjourned sine die.

¶17

The Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the appellant.

¶18

The Registry is directed not to list the matter unless and until

¶19

AMANDEEP GOSAIN 2025.07.02 17:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment

¶20

CRM-A-125-MA-2013

¶21

- 2 -

¶22

cost of ` 5,000/- is deposited in the Registry by the counsel for wasting time of this Court. “

¶23

Again on 19.12.2024, notice was issued and following order was

¶24

passed:-

¶25

“CRM-13721-2013

¶26

Prayer in this application is for condonation of delay of 7 days in filing the present application.

¶27

For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and delay of 7days in filing the present application is condoned. CRM-13722-2013

¶28

Allowed as prayed for.

¶29

CRM-A-125-MA-2013 (O&M)

¶30

Notice of motion, returnable for 12.05.2024.

¶31

Process fee be filed by 31.12.2024.

¶32

If the process fee is not filed, Registry to list the matter on 31.01.2025 on which date the present case shall be dismissed for non prosecution.”

¶33

¶34

On 24.04.2025, following order was passed:-

¶35

“1. In the present application, filed under Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C., for grant of special leave to appeal, notice was issued by this Court on 19.12.2024, for causing appearance of the respondents.

¶36

2. On 31.01.2025, proceedings in the matter was adjourned for 15.05.2025, by Court order. However, on general directions passed by the Hon’ble Chief Justice, present petition has been listed today.

¶37

3. As per office note, concerned counsels have been informed through e-mail as well as telephonically about the next date of hearing.

¶38

4. Today, there is no representation on behalf of the applicant.

¶39

5. List again on 06.05.2025.

¶40

AMANDEEP GOSAIN 2025.07.02 17:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment

¶41

CRM-A-125-MA-2013

¶42

- 3 -

¶43

6. To be shown in the urgent list.

¶44

7. Let counsel for the applicant/appellant be informed telephonically, about the next date of hearing fixed before this Court.”

¶45

On 06.05.2025, there was no representation on behalf of the applicant and the matter was adjourned to 02.07.2025 i.e. for today.

¶46

6 . Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant expresses her inability to assist the Court by submitting that the required contact could not be established with the applicant and therefore no assistance can be provided.

¶47

7 . In view of the aforementioned circumstances, this Court is left with

¶48

no other option but to dismiss the instant case for want of prosecution.

¶49

8 . Accordingly the instant petition is dismissed for want of prosecution.

¶50

(SANJAY VASHISTH) 02.07.2025 JUDGE amandeep Whether speaking/reasoned. : Yes/No Whether Reportable. : Yes/No

¶51

AMANDEEP GOSAIN 2025.07.02 17:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment

Karam Singh v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karam Singh v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raj Kumar Alias Paiya Vs State of Haryana

Navpreet Singh & Others Vs State of Punjab

Raman @ Bagri Vs State of Haryana

Peter Masih Vs State of Punjab

Shankra Nand Parbat Vs State of Punjab and Others

Kaku Singh Vs State of Punjab and Another