← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRR/1972/2014dismissed

Rakesh Kumar & ORS v. State Of Punjab & ANR

2019-07-03Mr. Justice Hari Pal Verma2 pages

CRR-1972-2014 (O&M)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH.

CRR-1972-2014 (O&M).

Decided on: July 3, 2019.

Rakesh Kumar and others .. Petitioners

VERSUS

State of Punjab and another .. Respondents * * *

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARI PAL VERMA * * * PRESENT Mr.Sherry K. Singla, Advocate, for the petitioners.

Mr.Harpreet Singh Multani, Asstt. A.G. Punjab. HARI PAL VERMA , J.

(ORAL) Petitioner has filed the present petition against the order dated 7.6.2014, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sri Muktsar Sahib, whereby the application filed by the prosecutrix seeking interim compensation was allowed and she was held entitled for interim compensation @ Rs.2,000/- per month from the date of the registration of the FIR i.e. 11.6.2011.

Arguing that the trial Court has no jurisdiction to pass RAJ KUMAR ARORA 2019.07.08 12:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRR-1972-2014 (O&M) such orders, the petitioner has preferred the present revision petition. Counsel for the petitioner has informed this Court that in FIR No.73 dated 11.6.2011, registered at Police Station Gidderbaha, District Sri Muktsar Sahib, at the behest of the complainant, the trial has culminated and the petitioner has been acquitted in the case though the complainant has filed a criminal appeal against the order of acquittal of the petitioner which is pending consideration before this Court bearing number CRM-A-982MA-2018. In view of the developments taken place during the pendency of the present petition, when the petitioner has been acquitted in the case, this Court finds that the present petition is rendered infructuous. However, counsel for the petitioner submits that vide order dated 5.11.

2014, notice of motion was issued in the case subject to deposit of Rs.50,000/-, with the Registry of this Court and operation of the impugned order dated 7.6.2014 was stayed. Counsel for the petitioner prayed that said amount be ordered to be returned to the petitioner. It is ordered that said deposited amount be released to the petitioner forthwith.

Dismissed as infructuous.

July 3, 2019.

(HARI PAL VERMA) raj arora JUDGE Whether speaking / reasoned Yes / No Whether reportable Yes / No RAJ KUMAR ARORA 2019.07.08 12:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document