Interim Order 7

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: 4 CC NI ACT 276/2023
MUKESH KUMAR Vs. TOTA RAM (Bhajan Pura)
16.03.2024
(VC Proceedings through CISCO Webex)
Present: Complainant is absent.
Sh. Paramdeep Singh, Ld. counsel for the complainant.
Accused in person.
Matter is at the stage of CE.
Passover sought by accused. Heard. Allowed till 10:30am
10:40am
Present: Complainant with counsel Sh. Paramdeep Singh.
Accused in person.
Again passover sought till 11:00am. Heard. Objected by counsel for the
complainant on the ground that neither the revision petition nor his counsel is appearing and it
is only a delay tactics as he is waiting and has to appear before another court.
11:11am
Present: Complainant with counsel Sh. Paramdeep Singh.
Accused in person.
Again passover sought. Heard. He is also apprised that everyone has to adhere
to VC rules and allowed till 11:15-20am subject to cost of Rs.100/-to be paid to the opposite
counsel/complainant for wasting his time.
Be awaited.
11:15am
Present: Complainant with counsel Sh. Sachin Kumar.
Accused with ld counsel Sh. Atul Kumar Sharma.
Despite giving opportunity to the counsel for the accused no revision petition is
filed by the accused. Counsel for the complainant submits that process was initiated and further
continued by Ld Predecessor and notice was framed against the accused and matter was fixed
for cross examination of complainant.
Perusal of record also shows that counsel for the accused firstly appeared on
17.05.2023 and then on 18.05.2023 and 21.07.2023 and till then no plea was taken and even the
process already done i.e. notice framing was not challenged and first time plea was taken on
15.01.2024 and he was granted one opportunity to approach the revisional court. Counsel for
the complainant also submits that undersigned has no power to recall or stay his own
proceeding and stage of notice comes after the summoning and has more weightage and shows
that there is sufficient material on record to proceed against the accused and missing of
summoning order is only a irregularity. It is also submitted by complainant that as the
Revisional Court is not approached, it seems that accused is only delaying the matter in this
court.
Now counsel for the accused has made baseless & unfounded allegations
against the presiding officer regarding the biasness. It is further submitted that though he was
not following the VC rules since morning, still court should not go for the cost. He is apprised
that the proceeding took place in open court in presence of the accused and as soon as he
switched on his camera, he was heard. He is being muted now as he is again levelling the
allegations.
Again unmuted, Counsel for the accused also submits that he does not need to
approach the revisional court as the proceedings is illegal par se. Heard. He is directed to file
the relevant judgment and written submissions in this regard within 7 days. He is also directed
to supply the advance copy to the counsel for the complainant. It is also further clarified that in
case the submissions are not filed the case will be proceeded as per law.
Put up for F/P on 04.05.2024 at 2:00pm(date is given as per convenience of
both parties present in the court).
(SNEHIL SHARMA)
MM/NI Act/Digital Court;
North-East/KKD/16.03.2024
-- 1 of 1 --