Skip to content


Sandeep Bhardwaj Vs. State of Haryana - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation

Court

Punjab and Haryana High Court

Decided On

Appellant

Sandeep Bhardwaj

Respondent

State of Haryana

Excerpt:


.....so as to enable the petitioner to deposit the remaining price of 319 bags of dap. on the last date of hearing i.e.19.5.2014, learned counsel for the petitioner prayed for one last adjournment for the aforementioned purpose. the same was granted and the hearing of the petition was adjourned for today. the interim order was directed to continue. it was, however, made clear that no further adjournment would be granted for the aforementioned purpose. on being asked by the court, counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner is not in a position to deposit the remaining price of 319 bags of dap as undertaken by him before this court on 25.9.2013. once the petitioner has not complied with the terms of the order dated 25.9.2013 by not depositing the remaining price of 319 bags of dap, he cannot be granted the concession of anticipatory bail. the petition is, accordingly, dismissed. ( t.p.s.mann ) june 30, 2014 judge ajay-1 kumar-i ajay 2014.07.01 14:07 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh

Judgment:


IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM M-32237 of 2013 Date of Decision : June 30, 2014 Sandeep Bhardwaj .....Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE T.P.S.MANN Present : Mr.Amandeep Saini, Advocate Mr.Raja Sharma, Asstt.

A.G., Haryana T.P.S.MANN, J.

(Oral) Prayer made in the petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

When the present petition had come up for preliminary hearing before a co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 25.9.2013, counsel for the petitioner informed the Court that the petitioner had already deposited Rs.1,50,000/- with the complainant Society vide receipt Annexure P-2 and would deposit another amount of Rs.1,00,000/- within two days.

Further, that he was ready to deposit the remaining price of 319 bags of DAP within a month.

In view of the said stand taken by the counsel for the petitioner, the Court issued notice and granted ad-interim relief to the petitioner.

CRM M-32237 of 2013 -2- The petition has been taken up for consideration on different occasions and every time request is made by the counsel for the petitioner for an adjournment so as to enable the petitioner to deposit the remaining price of 319 bags of DAP.

On the last date of hearing i.e.19.5.2014, learned counsel for the petitioner prayed for one last adjournment for the aforementioned purpose.

The same was granted and the hearing of the petition was adjourned for today.

The interim order was directed to continue.

It was, however, made clear that no further adjournment would be granted for the aforementioned purpose.

On being asked by the Court, counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner is not in a position to deposit the remaining price of 319 bags of DAP as undertaken by him before this Court on 25.9.2013.

Once the petitioner has not complied with the terms of the order dated 25.9.2013 by not depositing the remaining price of 319 bags of DAP, he cannot be granted the concession of anticipatory bail.

The petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

( T.P.S.MANN ) June 30, 2014 JUDGE ajay-1 Kumar-I Ajay 2014.07.01 14:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //