Karamjeet Kaur v. Daya Wanti

CRM-A-551-2020 KARAMJEET KAUR V/S DAYA WANTI

Present:

Ms. Gurnam Kaur Turka, Advocate for the applicant.

*** Counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the present applicaƟon was filed against acquiƩal in the year 2020 and she has a very good case on merit. Mr. Vijay Lath, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent and filed Vakalatnama, which is taken on record and submits that the judgment of acquiƩal is well reasoned and leave to appeal should not be granted. He further submits that in case, this Court grants leave to appeal and admit the main appeal, its turn will not come for hearing for decades, as such pendency of the appeal may be treated in-consequenƟal for the respondent.

Leave to appeal granted.

Counsel for the respondent submits that he be exempted from furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds before the concerned trial Court or Chief Judicial Magistate. He undertakes to surrender before the majesty of Court as and when this Court directed to do so or in case of reversal of the judgment.

Given such undertaking, there shall be no need to furnish bail bonds/surety bonds by the respondent.

Main appeal Admit.

List for final hearing on its own turn as per its queue following the roster of NI Act.

It is clarified that the pendency of this appeal shall not be construed against the accused-respondent in any manner whatsoever.

(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 20.11.2024 JyoƟ Sharma Jyoti Sharma 2024.11.21 10:38 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Sector 1, Chandigarh