Sukhbir vs Ramesh
2024 Latest Caselaw 10848 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Sukhbir vs Ramesh on 4 July, 2024

Author: Sandeep Moudgil

Bench: Sandeep Moudgil

                                    Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:082887




116
      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                           CHANDIGARH

                           CRR-300-2024 (O&M)
                           DATE OF DECISION: 04.07.2024

      SUKHBIR                                   ...PETITIONER
                    Versus
      RAMESH                                ... RESPONDENT

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL

Present:     Mr. Punit Malik, Advocate for the petitioner(s).
             Mr. M.K. Perwej, Advocate for the respondent.

        ***
SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL)

This revision petition has been filed challenging the order

dated 31.01.2024 passed by JMFC, Pataudi vide which the application

for condonation of delay in filing the complaint under Section 138 of

NI Act was dismissed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has prayed for quashing

of that order by submitting that the trial Court ought to have framed

issue once an application has been preferred by the petitioner and the

dismissal of the same merely on account of filing the said application

after lapse of six years without framing issue is bad.

Learned counsel for the respondent has taken support

from the observation made JMFC, Patudi in its impugned order and has

relied upon the judgment 'Kamal Singh vs. Mukesh Sharma and ors.' passed

by this Court. He submits that the impugned order is just, legal and in

accordance with law and as per proposition of law that i.e. an application for

condonation of delay cannot be filed at any stage.

                                   1 of 2

                                     Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:082887




CRR-300-2024 (O&M)                                            -2-

Be that as it may, such technicalities are not to be taken into

account in a criminal proceeding by the Trial Court to address the manner in

which the instant application seeking condonation of delay is dismissed.

The procedure to be followed was that on an application after having receipt

of reply from the respondent-accused an issue ought to have been framed to

the effect that whether the complaint filed under Section 138 of NI Act is

suffering from inordinate delay and latches and thereafter, providing ample

opportunity to lead evidence on that issue should have been adjudicated at

the time of passing the final judgement but same has not been followed by

the Trial Court, therefore, the impugned order suffers from illegality and the

same is not sustainable.

Consequently, impugned order dated 31.01.2024 is quashed

and the Trial Court is directed to frame an issue on the question of delay in

filing the complaint in question, thereafter, adjudicate the same by following

the procedure as per law.

The revision petition is allowed in the above terms.

                                      (SANDEEP MOUDGIL)
                                           JUDGE
04.07.2024
anuradha
Whether speaking/reasoned         Yes/No
Whether reportable                Yes/No




                                   2 of 2