Mandeep Sharma v. State Of Punjab
-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 102) Date of Decision:21.01.2022 Mandeep Sharma ...... Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab ......... Respondent
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMOL RATTAN SINGH
Present:
Mr. Mohit Sadana, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Ms. Puja Chopra, Advocate, for the complainant.
***** AMOL RATTAN SINGH, J. (ORAL) ase heard via
!"!#!$% &&'
%
%() *+ %
%% &
%
%",-
%
.
/% % &0 1$$2
!3#2!#!#
%&
%%45 %% % %%&&& % % 66
&
%
"#7 "!# 1
6% 6%%
%% 6 %.
%
6% &%' %
-2-
% &% %% %%
&
6 & 9 %
:%'% 6 %
% % % &
+ %6 &
6% %%%
%&&
6 ,;&
% ' ;####<)
' .% %%%
%
&%#2$!!#!# ='
%% % %% . %% % > ) ; % 6% %%%
'&&% %
6 6% , &
& '% & %
?& %&&6 % ;####<)
?% 9 %
6% :
% 6 %% '
& &
%> % @%% 6. 66 % % %& 6 % %%
% %%
6%
'%6
% &
%%
&
% %%
%
& &% '
% 6 &
% ! %
&
% &%
% % &
%%% % '% %
% %
% 6 6 %
%
6 !####<)%% '&
%!9 &%% 1:'% '
.
6% '&
%%66
% &
%%
&& &
% 6&
?% & %
%% %
%
%
<% %% %&&% >% &&& & '%&& % % &%
",-9!:
-3-
%
% %
%% '&
&
1&? %%
66
% & ''& 66%
%
6% 6
%% % %& 6 !####<)
#! !#!$ '& % 6 ,####<) !##,!#!$
' '& ;####<) %
6% ' . %<.% %%% &%
%#;#,!#!$ 1% 6 '&
% % &
&
&% %&& %
%. 6 "
&
6 '& &
6 % % '
%%%' %&& "&
% ,;&
=&&% % 6& '
. 6% %
%
=
%
%%% 6
%&& %
&&
%%
A = $-#-!#!$% &&'
%
%9 % + :() *9=
%
%&
%:
% %%% 6 % ;####<)' ' ?
% %
6% B& !#!$ & % 6
%
%
6 %
%&
'
% 6%%
%%%%%& 6 % $&. &
6
&
&%
6&&
66 %
%%
%6.
-4-
&
?
%
%!$#3!#!$'%
%%%
% ;####<)
,$#-!#!$ 1
&
%
%6
% %
%%
!"#!!#!$ &&
C
%
A On 21.09.2021 learned counsel for the complainant had submitted that the petitioner had paid Rs.50,000/- to the complainant on 09.09.2021, with counsel for the petitioner having undertaken that he would pay the next installment of Rs.50,000/- by September 30, 2021.
However, on 14.10.2021 learned counsel for the complainant had informed this court that the said undertaking had not been honoured by the petitioner, with no further amount having been paid by him. Counsel for the petitioner was not present on that date and the turn of the case having come up after 4:00 p.m., the interim order was not vacated and hearing in the matter adjourned to 25.10.2021. On that date, after reproducing the orders earlier passed, the contention of learned counsel for the complainant had been noticed to the effect that another sum of Rs.50,000/- had been received by the complainant a few days earlier, though not on 30.09.2021.
Consequently, the petitioner had been directed to pay simple interest @ 6% per annum on the delayed payments of Rs.50,000/- each as were to be made by June 30, 2021 and September 30, 2021 in terms of the order dated 24.02.2021. Interim protection to the petitioner had then been continued on the condition that he would pay another sum of Rs.50,000/- plus interest on delayed
-5payment by 31.12.2021; and if he did not do so the interim order passed on 24.02.2021 (directing him to join investigation and to be admitted to interim bail), would stand vacated on the next date of hearing, i.e. 07.01.2022. On 07.01.2022 counsel for the petitioner had not come present again, despite which the interim order had been continued though in the previous order passed on 25.10.2021 it had been stated that if the amount as directed vide that order was not found to have been paid by 07.01.2022, the interim order would stand vacated, with no further order required to be passed in that regard. Hearing in the matter had therefore been adjourned, with the interim order continued even on 07.01.2022, till today.
Today learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has nothing further to say except to apologize for the conduct of the petitioner in not paying the amount directed even vide the order dated 25.10.2021. That being so, with learned counsel for the complainant in any case having submitted that the said amount has not been paid to the complainant, I see no ground to entertain this petition any further, which is consequently dismissed and the interim order vacated.
January 21, 2022 (AMOL RATTAN SINGH) dinesh JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether Reportable No