Manpreet Singh v. State Of Punjab And Another

CRM-M No.58076 of 2024 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** CRM-M No.58076 of 2024 Date of decision : 17.12.2024 Manpreet Singh .............Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and another .......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMEET GOEL Present: Mr. Navjot Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. Yuvraj Singh Tiwana, AAG Punjab --- SUMEET GOEL, J. (ORAL) 1.

On 22.11.2024, the parties were directed to appear before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for having recorded their statements in terms of the compromise. Report in this regard dated 10.12.2024 has been received from Harish Kumar, Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Khamanon, Punjab relevant whereof reads as under: 'In compliance to order dated 22.11.2024 passed by Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in CRM-M-58076-2024, titled as 'Manpreet Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another', it is most respectfully submitted that as reported by the Ahlmad (Criminal) and Reader of the Court of undersigned, no application has been filed by any of the parties for showing their any intention for getting recorded their statements on 26.11.2024 or thereafter on any other date till today, in pursuance to the order dated 22.11.

2024 of Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court. Moreover, there is no document on records of this Court which ever shows any appearance of respondent/complainant Pooja and accused Manpreet Singh before the court on 26.11.2024. Therefore, no report can be Ashwani Kumar 2024.12.

CRM-M No.58076 of 2024 -2submitted by the court of undersigned regarding any compromise between the parties.'

2.

A perusal of the above shows that the parties have chosen not to appear before the concerned Court as directed earlier by this Court for having recorded their statements. No explanation much less plausible explanation come forward as to why parties have chosen not to appear before the said Court.

3.

Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances, this Court is left with no other option but to dismiss the instant petition. 4.

Ordered accordingly.

5.

The present order shall not be construed as any kind of interdiction upon the rights of the petitioner to file afresh, if cause of action so ensues.

(SUMEET GOEL) JUDGE 17.12.2024 Ashwani Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No Ashwani Kumar 2024.12.17 16:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document