Narinder Singh v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-65293-2024 Decided on : 07.01.2025 Narinder Singh . . . Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Punjab . . . Respondent(s)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT:

Mr. L.M. Gulati, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

Mr. Amandeep S. Samra, AAG, Punjab.

**** SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral) 1.

By way of present petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., petitioner is seeking quashing of order dated 18.07.2024 (Annexure P-3), passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class (JMIC), Amritsar, vide which the petitioner has been declared as proclaimed person in case FIR No.0222, dated 19.09.2019, under Sections 323, 341, 332, 353, 186, 189, 382, 295, 506, 34 of IPC, registered at Police Station Civil Lines, District Amritsar City (Annexure P-1). 2.

On the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner states that there are total three accused and two of the accused i.e. Bablu Kumar and Prem Kumar, have filed a separate quashing petition i.e. CRM-M-63174-2024, which is now fixed for 04.02.2025. Being third accused, present petitioner i.e. Narinder Singh, has filed the present and separate petition.

3.

Mr. L.M. Gulati, learned counsel for the petitioner expresses his difficulty by submitting that until the impugned order dated 18.07.2024 (P-3) is stayed or set-aside, whereby, he has been declared as 'proclaimed person', he would not be able to appear before the learned Trial Court and to make statement in regard to the factum of compromise having been arrived at between the parties. Therefore, he indicates all his inclination to join the Court proceedings since the JAWALA RAM 2025.01.08 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

CRM-M-65293-2024 - 2 - dispute has been completely resolved with the sole complainant. 4.

Notice of motion.

5.

On asking of the Court, Mr. Amandeep S. Samra, AAG, Punjab, who is present in the Court and already possessed with the paper-book, while accepting the notice for the respondent-State, submits that intentionally petitioner has chosen not to appear before the Trial Court and thus, has committed offence against the Court, therefore, he does not deserve any leniency or protection. 6.

Heard.

7.

Considering the submissions addressed and after going through the averments made in the petition, as well as the object of law to resolve the dispute between the parties within the shortest possible time period, I hereby accept the plea of the petitioner and therefore, while allowing the prayer made in the present petition, petitioner is directed to appear before the learned Trial Court within a period of ten days from today. On his appearance, he would be released on bail subject to his furnishing fresh bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.

Besides, petitioner would submit specific undertaking/affidavit that he will keep appearing during the proceedings of the trial in future and the proceedings would not be delayed because of his conduct. 8.

Needless to mention here that on compliance of all the conditions mentioned here-in-above, impugned order dated 18.07.2024 (P-3) would become inoperative qua the petitioner and would be deemed to be set-aside to the extent of declaring him proclaimed person.

9.

Petition stands disposed of accordingly.

(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE January 07, 2025 J.Ram Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No JAWALA RAM 2025.01.08 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document