IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND

HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRM No.______ of 2017

In Crl. Appeal No.______SB of 2017

Sukhwinder Kaur
Applicant/Appellant

Versus
Balbir Singh
Respondent

Application Under Section 5 of

Limitation Act for condonation of

delay of 7 days in filing the

appeal.

RESPECTFULY SHOWETH :

1. That the present applicant/appellant is filing

the present appeal before this Honble Court

and is sanguine about the success of the same

on the basis of the grounds taken therein.

2. That the applicant/appellant had filed a

complaint which was dismissed in default vide

order dated 14.9.2016. The applicant/

appellant moved an application for restoration

of the complaint which was dismissed vide

order dated 1.3.2017.

3. That the applicant/appellant the certified

copy of the order dated 1.3.2017 on 2.3.2017,

which was prepared on 8.3.2017 and delivered

on 9.3.2017.

4. That the applicant/appellant was in the

impression that there are 90 days for filing

the appeal and hence caused the delay of 7

days in filing the appeal.

5. That the delay of 7 days in filing the appeal

is unintentional and without any ulterior

motive.

It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that

the delay of 7 days in filing the appeal may

kindly be condoned, in the interest of

justice.

Note : Affidavit is attached.

CHANDIGARH (SATNAM SINGH GILL & MANJOT KAUR)

DATED : 15.5.2017 ADVOCATES
COUNSEL FOR APPLICANT/APPELLANT
E.NO.P/534A/1990 & E.No.P/3671/16
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH

CRM No.______ of 2017

In Crl. Appeal No.______SB of 2017

Sukhwinder Kaur
Applicant/Appellant

Versus
Balbir Singh
Respondent

Affidavit of Sukhwinder Kaur wife or

Rajwinder Singh, aged about 42 years,

resident of H.No.315, Street No.7, North

Avenue, Patiala, Distt. Patiala.

I the above named deponent do hereby solemnly

affirm and declare as under :-

1. That the deponent is well conversant with the

facts of case. The application has been drafted

under the instructions of the deponent. The

contents of the application as well as prayer are

true and correct to the knowledge of the deponent.

PATIALA
DATED : 15.5.17 DEPONENT

VERIFICATION :

Verified that the contents of my above affidavit are

true and correct to my knowledge. No part of it is

false and nothing has been concealed therein.

PATIALA
DATED : 15.5.17 DEPONENT
 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND
HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRM No.______ of 2017

In Crl. Appeal No.______SB of 2017

Sukhwinder Kaur
Applicant/Appellant

Versus
Balbir Singh
Respondent

Application Under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

for exemption from filing certified

copy of impugned order dated 14.9.2016

as well as placing on record Annexure

A-1.

RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH :

1. That the applicant/appellant is filing the

accompany appeal in this Honble Court and is

sanguine about the success of the same on the

basis of grounds taken therein.

2. That the applicant/appellant is not having

readily available the certified copy of

impugned order dated 14.9.2016. However the

true typed copy of the same is being attached

 herewith the appeal for kind perusal of this

Honble Court.

3. That the applicant/appellant wants to place on

record Annexure A-1. The document Annexure A-1

is necessary to be placed on record for just

decision of the case.

It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that

the applicant/appellant may kindly be exempted

from filing certified copy of impugned order

dated 14.9.2016 as well as the

applicant/appellant be allowed to place on

record Annexure A-1, in the interest of

justice.

Note : Affidavit is attached.

CHANDIGARH (SATNAM SINGH GILL & MANJOT KAUR)

DATED : 15.5.2017 ADVOCATES
COUNSEL FOR APPLICANT/APPELLANT
E.NO.P/534A/1990 & E.No.P/3671/16
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH

CRM No.______ of 2017

In Crl. Appeal No.______SB of 2017

Sukhwinder Kaur
Applicant/Appellant

Versus
Balbir Singh
Respondent

Affidavit of Sukhwinder Kaur wife or

Rajwinder Singh, aged about 42 years,

resident of H.No.315, Street No.7, North

Avenue, Patiala, Distt. Patiala.

I the above named deponent do hereby solemnly

affirm and declare as under :-

1. That the deponent is well conversant with the

facts of case. The application has been drafted

under the instructions of the deponent. The

contents of the application as well as prayer are

true and correct to the knowledge of the deponent.

PATIALA
DATED : 15.5.17 DEPONENT

VERIFICATION :

Verified that the contents of my above affidavit are

true and correct to my knowledge. No part of it is

false and nothing has been concealed therein.

PATIALA
DATED : 15.5.17 DEPONENT
 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND
HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRM No.______ of 2017

In Crl. Appeal No.______SB of 2017

Sukhwinder Kaur
Applicant/Appellant

Versus
Balbir Singh
Respondent

Application Under Section 378(4)

Cr.P.C. for leave to appeal.

RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH :

1. That the applicant/appellant is filing the

accompany appeal in this Honble Court and is

sanguine about the success of the same on the

basis of grounds taken therein.

2. That the applicant/appellant has filed a

complaint against the respondent under section

138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. The Ld.

Trial court vide its order dated 14.9.2016

 dismissed the complaint filed by the

applicant/appellant.

It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that

the applicant/appellant may kindly be granted

leave to appeal, in the interest of justice.

Note : Affidavit is attached.

CHANDIGARH (SATNAM SINGH GILL & MANJOT KAUR)

DATED : 15.5.2017 ADVOCATES
COUNSEL FOR APPLICANT/APPELLANT
E.NO.P/534A/1990 & E.No.P/3671/16
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH

CRM No.______ of 2017

In Crl. Appeal No.______SB of 2017

Sukhwinder Kaur
Applicant/Appellant

Versus
Balbir Singh
Respondent

Affidavit of Sukhwinder Kaur wife or

Rajwinder Singh, aged about 42 years,

resident of H.No.315, Street No.7, North

Avenue, Patiala, Distt. Patiala.

I the above named deponent do hereby solemnly

affirm and declare as under :-

1. That the deponent is well conversant with the

facts of case. The application has been drafted

under the instructions of the deponent. The

contents of the application as well as prayer are

true and correct to the knowledge of the deponent.

PATIALA
DATED : 15.5.17 DEPONENT

VERIFICATION :

Verified that the contents of my above affidavit are

true and correct to my knowledge. No part of it is

false and nothing has been concealed therein.

PATIALA
DATED : 15.5.17 DEPONENT
 GROUNDS OF APPEAL

1. That the orders passed by the Ld. Trial Court

dated 14.9.2016 whereby the complaint under

section 138 N.I. Act filed by the appellant

was dismissed, is illegal, incorrect, improper

and liable to be set aside.

2. That the brief facts of the case are that the

appellant filed a private complaint under

section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act

against the respondent/accused. During the

pendency of the appeal the appellant did not

appear on 14.9.2016 due to illness and her

counsel moved an application for exemption but

the Ld. Trial Court dismissed the complaint

under the provisions of Section 216 Cr.P.C.

without application of judicial mind.

3. That in the present case the appellant also

moved an application on 15.9.2016 before the

Ld. Trial Court for restoration of the

complaint on its original position but the

application for restoration was dismissed vide

order dated 1.3.2017. A copy of the order

 dated 1.3.2017 is annexed herewith as Annexure

A-1.

4. That it is important to mention here that the

complainant/appellant filed the private

complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable

Instruments Act read with Section 420 IPC

against the respondent and the Ld. Trial Court

summoned the accused/respondent vide order

dated 4.3.2015 after issuing the summoning to

the accused the accused/respondent appeared

and furnished the bail bonds, but when the

case of the appellant was fixed for her cross-

examination on that day the appellant did not

appear due to not feeling well and her counsel

moved an application for exemption but her

complaint was dismissed without application of

judicial mind and without giving the property

opportunity to the complainant. The

complainant/ appellant has no intention to

linger on the trial and she is the affected

party. The cheque issued by the respondent for

an amount of Rs.9,00,000/- in favour of the

complainant/appellant has been dishonoured and

he failed to make the payment within

stipulated period of notice. Therefore, he has

 committed an offence under section 138 of

Negotiable Instruments which is the cognizable

offence.

5. That the complaint of the appellant/

complainant has been dismissed by the Ld.

Trial Court only on the ground that she moved

the application for exemption.

6. That the appellant/complainant also filed an

application for restoration as mentioned above

but the Ld. Trial Court dismissed the same on

the ground that proper remedy is lie in the

form of filing the revision etc. Therefore,

the present appellant is filing this appeal

within time after dismissal of her

application.

7. That the appellant has not filed any such or

similar appeal either in this Honble Court or

in the Honble Supreme Court.

It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that

the appeal be accepted, impugned order dated

14.9.2016 passed by the Ld. Trial Court be set

aside, in the interest of justice.

 It is further prayed that the complaint of

the appellant be restored to its original

position, in the interest of justice.

Note: Affidavit is attached.

CHANDIGARH (SATNAM SINGH GILL & MANJOT KAUR)

DATED : 15.5.2017 ADVOCATES
COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT
E.NO.P/534A/1990 & E.No.P/3671/16
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH

Crl. Appeal No.______SB of 2017

Sukhwinder Kaur Appellant

Versus
Balbir Singh Respondent
Affidavit of Sukhwinder Kaur wife or

Rajwinder Singh, aged about 42 years,

resident of H.No.315, Street No.7, North

Avenue, Patiala, Distt. Patiala.

I the above named deponent do hereby solemnly

affirm and declare as under :-

1. That the deponent is well conversant with the

facts of case. The appeal has been drafted under

the instructions of the deponent. The contents of

the appeal as well as prayer are true and correct

to the knowledge of the deponent.

2. That the deponent has not filed any such or

similar appeal either in this Honble Court or in

the Honble Supreme Court.

PATIALA
DATED : 15.5.17 DEPONENT

VERIFICATION :

Verified that the contents of my above affidavit are

true and correct to my knowledge. No part of it is

false and nothing has been concealed therein.

PATIALA
DATED : 15.5.17 DEPONENT
 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND
HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Crl. Appeal No._____SB of 2017

(In COMA No.1054 of 2016)

MEMO OF PARTIES

Sukhwinder Kaur wife of Rajwinder Singh, aged

about 42 years, resident of H.No.315, Street No.7,

North Avenue, Patiala, Distt. Patiala.

... Appellant/Complainant

Versus

Balbir Singh son of Amar Singh, resident of

Century Enclave, Patiala, Distt. Patiala.

... Respondent

CHANDIGARH (SATNAM SINGH GILL & MANJOT KAUR)

DATED : 15.5.2017 ADVOCATES
COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT
E.NO.P/534A/1990 & E.No.P/3671/16
In the court of Sh. Inderjeet Singh, PCS, Judicial
Magistrate, Ist Class, Patiala.

Sukhwinder Kaur Vs. Balbir Singh

Present: None for complainant.

Sh. H.S. Kathuria Adv. counsel for

accused.

Accused present. Case called several times

but no one appeared on behalf of complainant. Let

file be put up after lunch.

Sd/-
(inderjeet Singh)
JMIC/14.9.2016

Present: Sh/H.S. Kathuria, Adv. counsel for

accused.

File taken up again at 2.30 p.m. Ld.

counsel for complainant moved exemption

application on behalf of complainant. Perusal of

the file shows that case is fixed for cross

examination of CW1 (complainant). Today third

conjective exemption application is filed by the

counsel for complainant. In today the application

reason for exemption of complainant is quoted that

complainant is not feeling well. On previous

occasion exemption was moved wherein similar

reason was quoted. On last date of hearing ld.

counsel for the complainant as she usually remains

ill. But no compliance to be stated words has been

made by the complainants counsel. Therefore it

seems that complainant is not interesting in

pursuing the present complaint. Accordingly the

present complaint is dismissed under the

provisions of Section 216 Cr.P.C. file be

consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Pronounced in open Court. Sd/-

14.9.2016 (Inderjeet Singh)
Judicial Magistrate Ist Class,
Patiala.

True Copy

(Advocate)
 Annexure A-1

In the Court of Sh. Inderjeet Singh, PCS, Judicial

Magistrate, Ist Class, Patiala.

CRM/5814/16

PBPF 0300579616

CRM 778/2016

209/15.9.16

Comp. No.209 of 15.9.16

P. for 1.3.17

Sukhwinder Kaur w/o Rajwinder Singh R/o # 315, St.

No.7, North Avenue, Patiala.

Applicant/Complainant

Versus

Balbir Singh s/o Amar Singh R/o Century Enclave,

Patiala.

Accused

In the matter of complaint 138 of Negotiable

Instruments Act.

Application for restoration of the above titled

complaint to its original position.

contd
Present: Sh. Arun Bansal Adv., counsel for the

applicant.

Arguments heard on the application for

restoration of the complaint interalia on the

ground that complaint was dismissed in default

vide order dated 14.2.2016 vide which exemption

application has been filed.

Perusal of the original file shows that

repeated exemption applications have been filed by

the complainant without any justifiable ground and

present complaint has been filed for want of

prosecution. Further proper remedy lies in the

form of filing revision etc., and the present

application does not try in the Trial Court.

Accordingly, the application in hands is

dismissed.

Sd/-
Inderjeet Singh (PB0376)
JMIC/PTA/01.03.2017

True Copy

(Advocate)
 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND
HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Crl. Appeal No._____SB of 2017

Sukhwinder Kaur

... Appellant

Versus

Balbir Singh

... Respondent

INDEX
Sr. Particulars Date Page Court
No. Nos. Fee
1. Application U/s 5 15.5.17 1-2
of Limitation Act
for condonation of
delay in filing
the appeal
2. Affidavit 15.5.17 3

3. Application U/s 15.5.17 4-5

482 Cr.P.C. for
exemption and
place on record
4. Affidavit 15.5.17 6
5. Application U/s 15.5.17 7-8
378(4) Cr.P.C. for
leave to appeal
6. Affidavit 15.5.17 9
7. Grounds of Appeal 15.5.17 10-14
8. Affidavit 15.5.17 15
9. Memo of Parties 15.5.17 16
10. Impugned order 14.9.16 17-18
passed by the Ld.
JMIC, Patiala
11. Annexure A-1 (Copy 1.3.17 19-20
of order)
12. Power of Attorney 21
13. Photocopy of 14.9.16 22
impugned order
passed by the Ld.
JMIC, Patiala
14. Certified copy of 1.3.17 23-24
Annexure A-1
(Order)
15. Total Court Fee

CHANDIGARH (SATNAM SINGH GILL & MANJOT KAUR)

DATED : 15.5.2017 ADVOCATES
COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT
E.NO.P/534A/1990 & E.No.P/3671/16
 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND
HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Crl. Appeal No._____SB of 2017

Sukhwinder Kaur
... Appellant
Versus

Balbir Singh
... Respondent

TOTAL COURT FEE ASSESSED

CHANDIGARH (SATNAM SINGH GILL & MANJOT KAUR)

DATED : 15.5.2017 ADVOCATES
COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT
E.NO.P/534A/1990 & E.No.P/3671/16