High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh
Case Law Search
Rajan Gughani v. State of Punjab and Another - CRM-72208-M-2006  RD-P&H 10412 (13 November 2006)
CRL.M.No.72208-M of 2006
DATE OF ORDER:17.11.2006
State of Punjab and Another
CORUM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. AGGARWAL .*.*.*.
Present: Mr. G.S. Kaura, Advocate.
This is petition against order dated 30.9.2006 passed by JMIC, Faridkot whereby trial Court had ordered that proceedings against Keemti Lal Jain be separated and trial should start as against remaining accused.
Present petitioner happens to be one of the remaining accused and authorized signatory.
Case is for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. It was filed by Karam Chand respondent No.2 as against Arihant Cotsy Ltd, Lovkesh Mahajan, Rajan Guglani and Keemti Lal.
It appears that this complaint was pending since 1999. Other two accused had put in appearance whereas Keemti Lal could not be CRL.M.No.72208-M of 2006 #2#
apprehended although warrants had been issued during the last about 5-6 years back and under these circumstances, trial Court had ordered that case of Keemti Lal be separated and trial should start as against other two accused.
Counsel for the petitioner argues that if Keemti Lal is not appearing then trial Court should have declared him as proclaimed offender and in that case, Keemti Lal would have surrendered and settled the dispute.
I have gone through the order. Even if trial Court could have adopted the method of declaring Keemti Lal as proclaimed offender, still this order does not cause any prejudice to the present petitioner.
I do not find any good ground to interfere.
However, trial Court may consider the request for exemption from personal appearance of the petitioner sympathetically, if an application is made in this regard and the petitioner is represented by counsel.
November 17, 2006 ( M.M. AGGARWAL )
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.