Gaurav Arora v. State Of Punjab
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-2353-2025 Date of Decision: 02.04.2025 Gaurav Arora ....Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab ....Respondent CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA
Present:
Mr. S.K. Passi, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Akshay Kumar, AAG, Punjab.
***** ANOOP CHITKARA, J.
FIR No.
Dated Police Station Sections 25.02.2020 City Barnala, District 25/29 of NDPS Act and Barnala 467/468/471/120B IPC The petitioner incarcerated in the FIR captioned above, has come up before this Court seeking regular bail under Section 439 CrPC. 2.
On 24.03.2025, the Judge Special Court, Barnala has passed the following order:- "Today, accused Krishan Arora has not come present, however, learned proxy counsel for the said accused filed an application for exempting the personal appearance of said accused, which is allowed for today only, for the reasons mentioned therein.
No DW is present.
Arguments concluded on behalf of accused namely Mohan Lal, Balwinder Kumar, Ishu Kumar, Naresh Mittal, Prem Kumar, Krishan Arora, Gaurav Arora, Harish Bhatia, Taiyab Qureshi, Hardeep Kumar, Ved Ram, Shakeel, Rupesh Kumar, Yogesh Kumar and Rajinder Kumar. To come up on 27.03.2025 for remaining DWs, if any. Ld. counsel for the accused Imran is again directed to produce the defence witnesses, if any, and for arguments on the date fixed." 3.
Thereafter on 27.03.2025, trial Court has passed the following order:- ANJU RANI 2025.04.04 12:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh
"Today, accused Krishan Arora has not come present. however, learned proxy counsel for the said accused filed an application for exempting the personal appearance of said accused, which is allowed for today only, for the reasons mentioned therein.
No DW is present. To come up on 01.04.2025 for remaining DWs, if any Ld. counsel for the accused Imran is again directed to produce the defence witnesses, if any, and for arguments on the date fixed." 4.
Petitioner's counsel submits that now the matter has been transferred to another Special Judge for further hearing and all the accused are required to address arguments afresh in that court which could delay the pronouncement of judgment and prayed for bail.
5.
On the other hand, State counsel submits that now the ball is in the Court of petitioner-accused and it is for them to conclude their case and State has no role in delay of trial.
6.
Given above, since the matter is at the fag end, this court does not deem it appropriate to interfere at this stage except to request the trial Court to expedite the matter. 7.
Given above, petition is disposed of with direction to the trial Court to conclude the trial expeditiously. Parties are directed not to seek unnecessary adjournment and in case, any of the accused seek unnecessary adjournment, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel his bail. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 02.04.2025.
anju rani Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable?
No ANJU RANI 2025.04.04 12:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh