Bhag Singh v. State Of Punjab And Others













































































        



    





!"

#$%$!& ''

  (

''

 $$!& ) * )%+% (   ,  ( '''

%-!&. &%   /0

'

(

( (   


 


 







 

 
 


 
 
 



  
 

  !!!!

( (  1 '

"
 #






$%&
''

 
( 



 
)*+)&+&+
,-
.&/
 
#
 1'
2

'3

'3


'4

1. &&.&+)5
 

6


7
8 
3 
9

:

3


 
#
 
 

3

  & "

 


 

 


 

'3

'3




$+*;$&+;<$
1'



&



'

0 1'
2

 
3

3
 8) %++++;.
"
#


3


 
))+=&+)5

 
 -
.)


 < "
3


:





'

0 1'
2
 ) +=&+)5


-
-
:


+5+5&+)5


 3 #














































































 

3







 


 '

 
:


3

 

)*+)&+&+
"
#

 
 
)*+)&+&+

 

-
.&



 $ 1



:




 



  "
 





 

 




 


 





 

"




:


 

 



  

:

3 

 3


 
1
 



 
  #
3

;3


 



 '.)5
 3

 
:


 
1
:


 #


 
 
 3

:



'
 

 
 
 3

 
:

#
 

0  #
&+&+
>

 

 3 

:







: 

  
 8 






 3


 


  

      

   





  !"!# $$" %&#'()


 

 

:



  3#
#
:

#






(



 
 

$%&
''
:


3   * ?


 


  




 
&

$ = "
-#




 
 
3

  
3 
>:



1


 

 



  3


>@ 
3
'

3 


(




 

 #
:


 
 
3
   
 

:















































































 % 1
 
 

 





  

 5 6




3 

: 


 


 3


>@ 
3
'


 


   

        
, /


 3
 
 : .

9. Bearing in mind the aforestated legal position in regard to the scope and width of the power of the High Court under section 482 of the Code, we are of the opinion that the impugned decision is clearly indefensible. As noted above, the High Court has rejected the petition under section 482 of the Code on the ground of availability of an alternative remedy without considering the seriousness of the nature of the offences and the fact that the Trial Court had dismissed the complaint on a hyper technical ground viz. since the complainant had been appearing in person, despite order dated 16th April 1999, exempting him from personal appearance, the said exemption order became redundant and the complainant should have sought a fresh exemption from personal appearance. We feel that such a view defies any logic.

An order of exemption from personal appearance continues to be in force till it is revoked or recalled. We are convinced that in the instant case, rejection of appellants petition under section 482 of the Code has resulted in miscarriage of justice. Availability of an alternative remedy of filing an appeal is not an absolute bar in entertaining a petition under section of the Code . As aforesaid, one of the circumstances envisaged in the said Section, for exercise of jurisdiction by the High Court is to secure the ends of justice.













































































 exercise its jurisdiction to set aside such an order so that the Trial Court could proceed with the trial on merits. ,3 
 / )+ '3
 


 


 
 
  #
 ;3


:


 

 

)*+)&+&+
 

: 
3


 3


3

 

1


 
3
 

 



 




 
 





"

'
 


3


 

 
 '.)5
 3

:




#3
A
3 #  

 
3#






(






: 

 




$%&
'' )) 1
:








:
" 3 

 
)*+)&+&+
,-
.&/
 
#

0 1' 2

'3

'3


'4

1. &&.&+)5




 3











3


"

' 



:

"




: 2( (  3   ''

 (

45 5 ) %- 6$&78) %!& .

%8!

45 5 ) ) -!) 9: 

%8!