Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Sanjeev Narula vs M/S Elkay International Limited on 20 November, 2019

Author: Harnaresh Singh Gill

Bench: Harnaresh Singh Gill

                                                                  -1-
CRM-M-49286-2019


      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                     CHANDIGARH

                                          CRM-M-49286-2019
                                          Date of Decision:20.11.2019

Sanjeev Narula

                                                           ... Petitioner
                                        Versus

M/s Elkay International Limited

                                                          ... Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL


Present:    Mr. D.M.Bhalla and Mr. Arjun Kundra, Advocates,
            for the petitioner.

HARNARESH SINGH GILL, J. (Oral)

The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for brevity, 'Cr.P.C.') for setting aside the orders dated 26.07.2019 (Annexure P-1) and 18.10.2019 (Annexure P-2) passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Faridabad, in a complaint (Annexure P-3) titled as 'M/s Elkay International Limited Vs. M/s Lilliput Kideswear Limited and others', whereby right to cross-examine CW 2 by the petitioner has been denied and application under Section 311 of the Cr.P.C. for recalling CW 2 has been dismissed, respectively.

The learned Magistrate has discussed that the petitioner- accused had wanted to approach this Court with a prayer to stay the proceedings of the case, and the case had been adjourned time and again. Finally, the learned Magistrate has drawn the conclusion that since the petitioner-accused had not approached the High Court and had already 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 09-12-2019 19:56:50 ::: -2- CRM-M-49286-2019 availed sufficient time but still had not cross-examined CW 2.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and with their able assistance, have gone through the impugned orders.

At this stage, notice in this case is not being issued to the respondent as this would further delay the trial of the complaint.

Learned counsel for the petitioner prays that one effective opportunity may be granted to the petitioner to cross-examine CW 2.

In view of the above facts, but without adverting to the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed. The impugned orders dated 26.07.2019 (Annexure P-1) and dated 18.10.2019 (Annexure P-2) are set aside. The petitioner-accused No.3 is granted one effective opportunity to cross-examine CW 2, subject to payment of Rs.20,000/- as costs to be paid to the respondent-complainant before the trial Court.

A copy of this order be given dasti to the learned counsel for the petitioner under the signatures of the Reader to the Bench.




20.11.2019                                       (HARNARESH SINGH GILL)
parveen kumar                                          JUDGE


Note:           Whether speaking/reasoned                :    Yes/No
                Whether reportable                       :    Yes/No




                                   2 of 2
                ::: Downloaded on - 09-12-2019 19:56:51 :::