_______________________________________________________ vs State Of Himachal Pradesh & Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 3590 HP

                                                   1




         IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT
                          SHIMLA

                                          Cr.MMO No. 361 of 2021




                                                                         .
                                          Date of decision: 05.08.2021





     _______________________________________________________
     Gautam Goel                                                          ...Petitioner
                                  Versus





     State of Himachal Pradesh & others                                   ...Respondent
     Coram
     The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Chander Bhusan Barowalia,
     Judge





     1 Whether approved for reporting? Yes.

     _______________________________________________________
     For the petitioner:  Mr. Akshay Singh, Advocate
                   r      (through video conferencing).
     For the respondent: Mr.   Amit    Dhumal,                                        Deputy
                         Advocate General.

     Chander Bhusan Barowalia, J.                         (oral)

The instant petition has been maintained by the

petitioner under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for exempting him from

personal appearance in the trial, which is pending before the

Court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class Paonta Sahib,

District Sirmaur, H.P., in case titled as State of H.P. vs.

Gaurav Goel and others, wherein the petitioner has been

arrayed as accused No. 2 and the case is fixed for

24.09.2021.

Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

as the Court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Paonta Sahib,

.

is being manned by learned Judicial Magistrate 2nd Class, he

moved an application before the learned Additional Chief

Judicial Magistrate, Paonta Sahib, but the same was

dismissed for want of jurisdiction. He has further argued

that as the petitioner has to join his duties in Merchant Navy

and there was paucity of time, he has moved the instant

petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. He submits that the

matter is of urgent nature and orders are required to be

passed in a day or so, otherwise the petitioner is likely to

lose his job.

3. This Court finds that the exemption from

appearance whether to be granted or not to an accused is to

be considered by the Court having the jurisdiction and as

the Court is presided over by learned Judicial Magistrate 2nd

Class, Paonta Sahib, in these peculiar circumstances of the

case, the jurisdiction can be exercised by the Court of

learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nahan.

4. Learned Deputy Advocate General states that as

per the information received by him, learned Chief Judicial

Magistrate, Nahan, is likely to be there from tomorrow

.

onwards. Under these circumstances, at this stage, this

Court deems it appropriate to direct Chief Judicial

Magistrate, Nahan, to call for the records of the case from

Judicial Magistrate 2nd Class, Paonta Sahib, and try to

dispose of the application for exemption moved by the

petitioner afresh after considering the material on record

within a week from the date the petitioner produces the copy

of this order alongwith the application for exemption.

5. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of so

also pending application(s), if any.

Copy dasti.

( Chander Bhusan Barowalia ) Judge

5th August, 2021

(virender)