UDCPR | Municipal Authorities Empowered To Grant Relaxation For Recreational Open Spaces In Redevelopment Projects: Bombay High Court Appellate Court Can Enhance Compensation Under Motor Vehicles Act Even Without Cross-Appeal By Claimants: Allahabad High Court State Instrumentalities Cannot Supplement Reasons For Withholding Public Money Via Affidavits Years Later: Calcutta High Court Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act | Victim's Status As 'Illegal Immigrant' Does Not Dilute Offence Or Shield Perpetrator: Bombay High Court Clubbing Of Criminal Trials | No Basis To Direct Consolidation If Connected Proceedings Have Already Concluded: Delhi High Court IBC ‘Clean Slate’ Principle Cannot Extinguish Pre-existing Crystallized Liability Under Labour Awards: Bombay High Court Section 406 IPC | 'Donation' Does Not Constitute 'Entrustment'; Criminal Prosecution Quashed In Absence Of Aggrieved Victim: Delhi High Court Failure To Deliver Possession Of Plot Constitutes "Continuous Wrong" Giving Rise To Recurrent Cause Of Action Under Consumer Protection Act: Delhi State Commission High Court Cannot Entertain Writ Petition Under Article 226 When Statutory Appellate Remedy Under Section 107 CGST Act Is Available: Gujarat High Court Appointment Of Temple Servants Is The Exclusive Prerogative Of The Hereditary Trustee: Kerala High Court Stay Of Suit Proceedings Under CPC Does Not Automatically Bar Adjudication Of Pending Temporary Injunction Application: Rajasthan High Court Section 136A MV Act | Supreme Court Directs States To Impound Vehicles With Unpaid E-Challans And Mandates Electronic Enforcement Compliance Section 115 CPC | Executing Court Cannot Dismiss Execution Petition On Hyper-Technical Grounds Regarding LRs Of Judgment Debtor: Himachal Pradesh High Court Succession Act | Will Not Validly Executed If Attesting Witness Admits Signing Without Witnessing Testator’s Signature: Madras High Court High Court Cannot Interfere Under Article 227 To Correct Errors Of Fact Or Act As An Appellate Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court Advocates Act 1961 | Bar Council Has No Power To Suspend Advocate Pending Disciplinary Enquiry: Allahabad High Court Identification Of Accused By Police Personnel In Pitch Darkness Without Prior Acquaintance Is Unreliable: Himachal Pradesh High Court Body Shaming Or Insulting Physical Appearance Does Not Per Se Constitute Offence Under Section 509 IPC: Karnataka High Court Drishyam 3 | Interim Injunction To Restrain Film Release Cannot Be Granted Without Establishing Clear Subsisting Legal Right: Madras High Court Town Planning Scheme | Statutory Notice To Occupiers Under Rule 12(2)(a) Punjab Municipal Rules Is Mandatory And Independent Of Notice To Owner: Punjab & Haryana High Court

"Justice Prevails in Balancing Personal Liberty and Societal Interests," Rules Punjab and Haryana High Court in Overturning Proclaimed Person Declaration

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, presided over by Justice Harpreet Singh Brar, set aside an order declaring Birender Singh a proclaimed person in a cheque dishonour case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The ruling, made on December 12, 2023, emphasizes the need for fair and reasonable procedures in criminal proceedings, aligning with the principles of Article 21 of the Constitution.

Justice Brar, in his oral judgment, underscored the importance of a meticulous approach in legal proceedings, stating, "While the scheme of criminal justice system necessitates curtailment of personal liberty to some extent, it is of the utmost importance that the same is done in line with the procedure established by law to maintain a healthy balance between personal liberty of the individual-accused and interests of the society in promoting law and order." This observation highlights the court's focus on upholding the delicate balance between individual rights and societal justice.

The case (CRM-M No. 62379 of 2023) involved the petitioner, Birender Singh, challenging the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Chandigarh, on September 30, 2023. The court had declared Singh a proclaimed person due to his non-appearance in the ongoing trial. Singh's counsel argued that his failure to appear was due to medical reasons, and the absence of an application for exemption from appearance led to the issuance of non-bailable warrants.

In a critical appraisal of the trial court's proceedings, Justice Brar noted procedural lapses, particularly the failure to comply with the mandatory conditions specified in Section 82 (2) of the Cr.P.C. The judgment referenced similar cases, including Major Singh @ Major Vs. State of Punjab and Sonu Vs. State of Haryana, to reinforce the mandatory nature of these procedural requirements.

Concluding the proceedings, the High Court allowed the petition, directing Singh to appear before the trial court within 15 days and fulfill the necessary bail and surety bond requirements. The court also imposed costs on Singh for wasting the court's time, ordering a payment of Rs.10,000 to the Poor Patient Welfare Fund, PGIMER, Chandigarh.

This judgment is a reminder of the judicial system's role in ensuring that procedural fairness is not overshadowed in the pursuit of justice, particularly in cases involving individual liberties.

 

Decided on: 12-12-2023

 

BIRENDER SINGH VERSUS  UNION TERRITORY OF CHANDIGARH AND ANOTHER

Latest Legal News