CRL.M.C./1624/2018 of PUNJAB TUBES LTD & ANR Vs THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+CRL.M.C. 1624/2018, CRL. M.As.5880-5881/2018PUNJAB TUBES LTD & ANR..... PetitionersPUNJAB TUBES LTD & ANR..... Petitioners

ThroughMr. Pardeep Gupta, Mr. Parinav,Ms.Mansi Gupta and Mr. MoazzamGupta, Advs.Ms.Mansi Gupta and Mr. MoazzamGupta, Advs.

versus

THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS ..... RespondentsThroughSI Satyender Gulia, PS Kalakaji.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAKO R R%05.07.2018

During the course of hearing, the only relief, which is pressed by thelearned counsel for petitioners is that order of Trial Court, wherebypetitioners have been declared Proclaimed Offender may be set aside. Restof reliefs have not been pressed.

Petitioner No.2 is the Director of petitioner No.1. Petitioners havebeen declared Proclaimed Offender by the Trial Court in the Complaint CaseNo. 2340/2015 filed by the respondent no.3 under Section 138 of theNegotiable Instrument Act, 1881 against the petitioners. Learned counsel forthe petitioners submits that petitioners were not served with the summonsissued by the Trial Court. Petitioner No.2 was not residing at the addressgiven in complaint. The address of the petitioner given in the complaint isthat of Mr. Mandeep Singh Gill. Arbitration proceedings also took placebetween the respondent No.3 and the petitioners, wherein address of the

petitioner no.2 was mentioned as 72-B, Vikas Nagar, Pakhowal Road,Ludhiana, Punjab.Respondent no.3 was aware of this address butmentioned wrong address.Petitioner No.2 is presently living at 773-F,Sahid Bhagat Singh Nagar, Pakhowal Road, Model Town, Ludhiana. Sincepetitioner no.2 was not living at the address given in the complaint evenNBWs had remained unexecuted.It is further submitted that during theproceeding under Section 82 Cr.PC, the Process Server had come to knowthat the petitioner no. 2 was not living at the address given in the complainti.e. 213-E, Sahid Bhagat Singh Nagar, Pakhowal Road,Ludhiana. HeadConstable Sukhvinder Singh of police station Kalkaji, who had gone toexecute the proceeding under Section 82 Cr.P.C, has recorded the statementof the person found at the said address, namely, Vineet Vasistha, whereinVineet Vasistha has categorically stated that Dalip Wadhwan (petitionerNo.2) had never resided at the said address. The Statement of VineetVashistha has been placed on record at page 41. Learned counsel for therespondent No.3 submits that address of the petitioner as contained in thedocuments available with the respondent No.3 has mentioned in thecomplaint. Petitioner did not notify any change of address of respondentNo.3.

Be that as it may, since the petitioners have made specific statementthat they are willing to join the proceedings, without going into the merit ordemerit of the case, the proceedings whereby petitioners were declared asProclaimed Offender are set aside.

Petitioners shall now appear before the Trial Court on 09[th]August,2018.

Trial court shall therefore proceed in the matter in accordance with

law.

Petition is disposed of.

JULY 05, 2018Pallavi

A.K. PATHAK, J