Criminal Misc.No.M-2679 of 2009 (O&M)
Present: Mr.A.S.Trikha, Advocate, for the petitioner.
*****
Notices issued to respondents not received back served or
otherwise.
Let fresh notices be issued to respondents for 17.07.2009.
March 16, 2009 (PRITAM PAL) mamta-II JUDGE
Criminal Misc.No.M-5418 of 2009
Present: Mr.Rajesh Khandelwal, Advocate,
for the petitioners.
Mr.Sunil Katyal, Senior D.A.G., Haryana,
for the respondent-State.
*****
At the request of learned counsel for the petitioners, adjourned
to 23.04.2009.
March 16, 2009 (PRITAM PAL) mamta-II JUDGE
Criminal Misc.No.27403 of 2007 and
Criminal Revision No.769 of 2007
Present: Mr.K.D.Sachdeva, D.A.G., Punjab,
for the petitioner.
None for the respondent.
*****
In the interest of justice, adjourned to 17.07.2009.
March 16, 2009 (PRITAM PAL) mamta-II JUDGE
Criminal Revision No.279 of 2007
Present: Mr.K.D.Sachdeva, Senior D.A.G., Punjab,
for the petitioner-State.
*****
To be heard alongwith Criminal Revision No.769 of 2007 on
17.07.2009.
March 16, 2009 (PRITAM PAL) mamta-II JUDGE
Criminal Revision No.364 of 2004
Present: None.
*****
In the interest of justice, adjourned to 17.07.2009.
March 16, 2009 (PRITAM PAL) mamta-II JUDGE
Criminal Revision No.799 of 2004 (O&M)
Present: Mr.A.S.Kakkar, Advocate,
for Mr.D.S.Pheruman, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr.K.D.Sachdeva, D.A.G., Punjab,
for the respondent-State.
*****
Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks time to place on file
the copy of the order, passed by Civil Court in the month of February, 2009,
showing that the petitioner was the owner of the stolen property.
Adjourned to17.07.2009.
March 16, 2009 (PRITAM PAL) mamta-II JUDGE
Criminal Revision No.228 of 2003
Present: None for the petitioner.
Mr.K.D.Sachdeva, D.A.G., Punjab,
for the respondent-State.
*****
In the interest of justice, adjourned to 17.07.2009.
March 16, 2009 (PRITAM PAL) mamta-II JUDGE
Criminal Misc.No.M-31213 of 2008
Present: Mr.I.P.S.Kohli, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr.K.D.Sachdeva, D.A.G., Punjab,
for the respondent-State.
*****
As per report of Registry, notice could not be issued to the
complainant as the copy of the petition was not filed.
Needful be done within a week and thereafter notice be issued
to the complainant for 23.04.2009.
March 16, 2009 (PRITAM PAL) mamta-II JUDGE
Criminal Misc.No.M-1284 of 2009 (O&M)
Present: Mr.A.D.S.Sukhija, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr.K.D.Sachdeva, D.A.G., Punjab,
for the respondent-State.
Mr.Vikram Chaudhary, Advocate,
for the complainant.
*****
Learned counsel for the complainant wants to place on file
some material which would show that the higher officials in the Police
Department and the accused are hand in glove to each other for cancellation
of this case.
Adjourned to 23.04.2009.
March 16, 2009 (PRITAM PAL) mamta-II JUDGE
Criminal Misc.No.M-1042 of 2009
Present: Mr.Om Parkash, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr.Sunil Katyal, Senior D.A.G., Haryana,
for the respondent-State.
*****
At the request of learned counsel for the petitioner, adjourned
to 18.03.2009.
March 16, 2009 (PRITAM PAL) mamta-II JUDGE
Criminal Misc.No.M-17239 of 2008
Present: None for the petitioner.
Mr.K.D.Sachdeva, D.A.G., Punjab,
for respondent No.1-State.
Mr.B.S.Jaswal, Advocate,
for respondent No.2-complainant.
*****
The case has been taken up twice. No one has appeared on
behalf of the petitioner.
In the interest of justice, adjourned to 19.03.2009.
March 16, 2009 (PRITAM PAL) mamta-II JUDGE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc.No.M-4172 of 2009 (O&M)
Date of Decision 16.03.2009
Pawan @ Sonu
……Petitioner
VERSUS
State of Haryana
……Respondent
CORAM:- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRITAM PAL
Present: Mr.R.M.Singh, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr.Sunil Katyal, Senior D.A.G., Haryana,
for the respondent-State.
*****
PRITAM PAL, J(ORAL):
Petitioner has brought this petition under Section 439 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure for seeking regular bail in case F.I.R.No.199
dated 01.08.207 under Sections 302, 307, 216, 148, 149 of I.P.C., and
25,54,59 of the Arms Act, registered at Police Station Sadar Bahadurgarh,
Distt. Jhajjar.
Admittedly, the petitioner was not armed with any weapon nor
he is attributed to have caused any injury to the deceased. The petitioner is
in custody since 06.12.2007. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends
that the case of the petitioner is by and large similar to that of co-accused
Atul, who was granted bail by this Court vide order dated 06.01.2009,
passed in Criminal Misc.No.M-23485 of 2008. In this case, two witnesses,
out of 31 witnesses of the prosecution, are stated to have been examined so
Criminal Misc.No.M-4172 of 2009 (O&M) -2-
far. Trial, in this case, is likely to take a long time.
In the given facts and circumstances and without commenting
on the merits of this case, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on
his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.
Criminal Misc. is disposed of.
March 16, 2009 (PRITAM PAL) mamta-II JUDGE
Criminal Misc.No.M-244 of 2009
Present: Mr.J.S.Brar, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr.K.D.Sachdeva, D.A.G., Punjab,
for the respondent-State.
*****
At the request of learned counsel for the petitioner, adjourned
to 18.03.2009.
March 16, 2009 (PRITAM PAL) mamta-II JUDGE
Criminal Misc.No.M-2865 of 2009 (O&M)
Present: Mr.Rohit Khullar, Advocate,
for he petitioner.
Mr.G.S.Chahal, A.P.P.,
for the respondent-U.T., Chandigarh.
*****
Learned State counsel submits that as per information received
from the police, petitioner is facing many other criminal cases and seeks
time to file list of the aforesaid cases.
Adjourned to 27.03.2009.
March 16, 2009 (PRITAM PAL) mamta-II JUDGE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc.No.M-34344 of 2008(O&M)
Date of Decision 16.03.2009
Mohd.Nadeem Mohammad
……Petitioner
VERSUS
State of U.T., Chandigarh and another
……Respondents
CORAM:- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRITAM PAL
Present: Mr.Rohit Khullar, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr.G.S.Chahal, A.P.P.,
for the respondent-U.T., Chandigarh.
*****
PRITAM PAL, J(ORAL):
After arguing for sometime, learned counsel for the petitioner
requests that this petition may be dismissed as withdrawn.
Request is allowed.
Dismissed as withdrawn.
March 16, 2009 (PRITAM PAL) mamta-II JUDGE
Criminal Misc.No.M-1528 of 2009
Present: Mr.Bikram Chaudhary, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr.Sunil Katyal, Senior D.A.G., Haryana,
for the respondent-State.
*****
Let the status report of the case be placed on the file by the
learned State counsel on or before 23.04.2009.
In the meantime, it is also to be ascertained as to whether the
sister of the deceased, who was married with the other son of the petitioner,
has been examined.
March 16, 2009 (PRITAM PAL) mamta-II JUDGE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc.No.M-43781 of 2007(O&M)
Date of Decision 16.03.2009
Parminder Singh ……Petitioner
VERSUS
State of Punjab
……Respondent
CORAM:- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRITAM PAL
Present: Mr.Rakesh Verma, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr.K.D.Sachdeva, D.A.G., Punjab,
for the respondent-State.
*****
PRITAM PAL, J(ORAL):
Petitioner has brought this petition under Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of criminal complaint under
Section 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 read with Clause 19(1) (a) of
Fertilizer Control Road, 1985 and summoning order dated 24.01.1995,
passed by and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the trial of the
petitioner has already been concluded before the trial Court, therefore, the
present petition has become infructuous.
In this view of the matter, the present petition is hereby
dismissed as having become infructuous.
March 16, 2009 (PRITAM PAL)
mamta-II JUDGE
Criminal Misc.No.M-
Present:
*****
March 16, 2009 (PRITAM PAL)
mamta-II JUDGE
Petitioner Suraj Pal has brought this petition under Articles
226/227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure to direct the respondents-State to release the petitioner
from jail on policy instructions dated 12.04.2002 in case F.I.R.No.4 dated
06.01.1976 under Sections 395, 396, 397, 460 of Indian Penal Code,
registered at Police Station Nuh, District Gurgaon (now Mewat).
Learned State counsel submits that on a similar point in another
case, stay has been granted by the Apex Court vide its order dated
06.01.2009, passed in S.L.Ps. No.9393, 9394 and 9395 of 2008.
Thus, it would be appropriate to adjourn this case sine-die till
the decision of the Apex Court, on the stay matter in the aforesaid S.L.Ps.
Parties would be at liberty to get this matter revived after the fate of the stay
in the aforesaid S.L.Ps, pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court is
decided.
Thus, adjourned sine-die.
Petitioner has brought this petition under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, for issuance of a writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus
and a Warrant Officer be appointed to locate the detenues mentioned in para
No. of the petition.
After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court feels
that before proceeding further in the matter, first it would be appropriate to
obtain the report of the District Magistrate, , regarding the
allegations contained in the petition. Ordered accordingly.
Notice of motion for to the District Magistrate,
Karnal-respondent No.2.
On the asking of the Court, Mr. , accepts
notice on behalf of respondents No. . Copy of the petition is handed
over to the learned State counsel.
Report be awaited.
Copy of the order be given dasti to the learned State counsel
under the signatures of the Court Secretary of this Court.