← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/5153/2025disposed of

Manglesh Singh v. Manoj Kumar

2025-07-14Mr. Justice Sanjay Vashisth2 pages

CRM-M-5153-2025 - 1 -

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-5153-2025 Decided on : 14.07.2025 Manglesh Singh . . . Petitioner(s)

Versus

Manoj Kumar . . . Respondent(s)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT: Mr. A.S. Gulati, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

**** SANJAY VASHISTH , J. (Oral) 1.

In the instant petition, on 29.04.2025, following order was passed:- "1.

Present petition has been filed without challenging the complaint and summoning order, having been issued against the petitioner u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (in short, 'NI Act').

2.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that before examining the submissions, he wishes to appear before the summoning Court, if he is protected from arrest till the time of his appearance, in pursuance to the summoning order dated 16.01.2024 (Annexure P-3). 3.

List on 14.07.2025.

4.

Considering the submission of the petitioner's counsel, it is observed that the operation of the NBW, if any, issued against the petitioner, shall remain stayed, subject to the appearance of the petitioner before the Court below within a period of two weeks from today."

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during the pendency of the present petition and in pursuance to the direction passed by this Court, petitioner has appeared before the Court concerned, where the JAWALA RAM 2025.07.16 11:19 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

CRM-M-5153-2025 - 2 - proceedings u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (in short, 'NI Act') are going on, therefore, the very purpose of issuance of non-bailable warrants of arrest has been served and thus, same are now inoperative/unexecutable.

3.

Continuing his submissions, learned counsel submits that in fact summoning order has also been challenged before this Court through instant petition.

4.

Petitioner has not challenged the summoning order before the Revisional Court i.e. Court of Sessions, at the first instance and has directly approached this Court by way of present petition. 5.

In view of the above, present petition is disposed of, by observing that in case, petitioner choose to file a revision petition before Court of Sessions within a period of four weeks from today, same would be decided on merits by such Revisional Court without adhering to the delay part, if any, after examining the complete record, as per law, within a period of next three months, by providing adequate opportunity to all the concerned parties.

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE July 14, 2025 J.Ram Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No JAWALA RAM 2025.07.16 11:19 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document