“Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Personal Liberty in Land Dispute Case”

Share:
disobedience land bail framing identity jail v property Land suits Mandatory Performance Criminal Live-in Relationships protection bail legal Land Live Acquisition landlord Crime appointment Gram Panchayat acquittal motor Father's Murder land civil actual account bail jurisdiction award land bail Deed constable licensing cbi sexual FIR bail cheque property property property Evidence e liberty

In a recent judgment handed down by the Punjab and Haryana High Court, personal liberty and the pursuit of justice were emphatically upheld. The case in question revolved around a property dispute and the dismissal of a complaint for non-prosecution at the pre-summoning stage.

In a noteworthy observation, the Honorable Aman Chaudhary, J., stated, “His absence was neither intentional nor willful. A serious prejudice would be caused to the petitioner in case he is not granted an opportunity to seek adjudication of the matter on its merits.”

The petitioner had filed a complaint in 2013 concerning a property dispute. Despite diligent attendance at court proceedings by either appearing himself or through his counsel, the summoning order had not been issued. On the crucial date of March 21, 2018, the petitioner could not appear in court due to the unavailability of railway tickets from his residence in Calcutta. In response, an application for exemption from personal appearance was filed, but it was unjustly declined by the Magistrate, leading to the dismissal of the complaint for non-prosecution.

The High Court, invoking Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) to secure the ends of justice, set aside the impugned order dated March 21, 2018. The trial Court was directed to restore the case to its original number and to decide it on its merits expeditiously, taking into account that the case had been pending since 2013.

This judgment underscores the importance of ensuring access to justice and the pursuit of cases on their merits, even when procedural issues arise. It serves as a reminder that personal liberty should be upheld and that dismissal for non-prosecution should be a measure of last resort, particularly when a complainant diligently pursues their case.

The High Court’s decision in this case aligns with the principles of fairness and justice and sets a valuable precedent for future cases involving similar circumstances.

 Date of Decision: 23.08.2023

Joginder Pal vs Mohan Lal and others

Download Judgment

Share: