Karan Partap Singla & Another v. Pankaj Singhania & Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-56843-2018 Date of decision: 21.08.2025 KARAN PARTAP SINGLA & ANOTHER .... PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

PANKAJ SINGHANIA & OTHERS ....RESPONDENT(S) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI

Present:

Mr. Rakesh Chopra, Advocate and Mr. Jashan Chopra, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Saurav Kanojia, Advocate for respondent No.1.

**** JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. (Oral) The prayer in the present petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is for quashing of the order dated 10.08.2016 (Annexure P-2), whereby the petitioners were ordered to be summoned under Section 138 and 141 of Negotiable Instruments, Act, 1881.

The learned counsel for the petitioners, at the very outset, submits that he confines his prayer seeking quashing of the summoning order on the ground that no notice was given to the petitioners at the time the delay in filing of the complaint was condoned. The learned counsel for the complainant admits the said factum that in fact no notice was given to the petitioners prior to the passing of the summoning order.

In view of the stand taken, the present petition is allowed and KUSUM 2025.08.22 14:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC Chandigarh

CRM-M-56843-2018 the summoning order dated 10.08.2016 and all subsequent orders arising therefrom stands quashed.

The Trial Court shall prior to the passing of the fresh summoning order hear the petitioners on the question of delay in filing of the complaint.

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

The Trial Court is requested to adjudicate upon the application for condonation of delay within a period of 04 weeks from the next date of hearing fixed before it.

(JASJIT SINGH BEDI) 21.08.2025 JUDGE Kusum Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No KUSUM 2025.08.22 14:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document PHHC Chandigarh