Punjab-Haryana High Court
Cj Darcl Logistic Limited vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 4 April, 2019
Author: Arvind Singh Sangwan
Bench: Arvind Singh Sangwan
CRM-M-48657-2018 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-48657-2018
Date of decision: 04.04.2019
CJ Darcl Logistic Limited
... Petitioner
Vs.
State of Haryana and others
... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN
Present: Ms. Anita Kumari, Advocate for
Mr. Rose Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner.
*******
ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, J. (ORAL)
Prayer in this petition is for issuance of direction to respondents No.2 to 5 to take appropriate legal action against respondents No.6 & 7 for committing offence with the petitioner-company.
Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the order dated 16.11.2018 passed in CRM-M-50241-2018, which reads as under: -
"In the instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., prayer has been made for issuance of directions to respondents No.2 to 6 to take appropriate legal action against private respondents No.6 & 7 for committing offence with the petitioner-company.
Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the purpose of instant petition would be achieved, if, respondent No.4- Superintendent of Police, Panipat is directed to decide representation dated 16.05.2018 (Annexure P-3), moved by the petitioner.
1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 14-04-2019 19:15:27 ::: CRM-M-48657-2018 -2- In view of the above, respondent No.4-Superintendent of Police, Panipat, is directed to look into the matter and decide representation Annexure P-3, moved by the petitioner, in accordance with law, by passing a speaking order and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the authorized person of the petitioner, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
The instant petition stands disposed of, accordingly."
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, in both the cases, is the same, whereas the private respondents are different persons and further submits that appropriate directions may be issued to the official respondents.
In view of the above, Superintendent of Police, Rohtak-respondent No.4 is directed to look into the matter and decide the representation dated 14.10.2017 (Annexure P-2) moved by the petitioner, in accordance with law, by passing a speaking order and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the authorized person of the petitioner-company, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
Disposed of, accordingly.
[ ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN ]
04.04.2019 JUDGE
vishnu
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether Reportable : Yes/No
2 of 2
::: Downloaded on - 14-04-2019 19:15:27 :::