(2022) Law Today Live Doc. Id. 16696 = 2022 (1) L.A.R. 360
Decided on: 22.04.2022
Alongwith
CRM-M-16341-2022 (O&M), Aushim Khetarpal v. Arminder Singh
And
CRM-M-16397-2022 (O&M), Aushim Khetarpal v. Ranjanpreet Kaur
Present:
Mr. R.S. Bajaj, Advocate for the petitioner (in all cases).
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (26 of 1881), Section 138, 142 – Cheque bounce case -- Quashing of non-bailable warrants – Petitioner ready to surrender and apply for regular bail -- Further submitted that since the petitioner is resident of Delhi, he has no local surety and he can furnish security bonds as per valuation certificate regarding his residential house, therefore, the trial Court may be directed to accept the bail/security bonds in this regard – Considering the limited prayer direction given that in case the petitioner appears before the trial Court within a period of 15 days, the trial Court will not insist upon furnishing a local surety and will accept any other surety/security bonds, on the basis of property offered by the petitioner.
(Para 1-4)
***
ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, J. (ORAL) –
1. Prayer in CRM-M-16293-2022 is for quashing of the order dated 22.11.2021 and the order dated 05.04.2022 passed by the trial Court, vide which non-bailable warrants have been issued against the petitioner in Criminal Complaint No.NACT 3943 of 2020, registered on 18.03.2020, titled as Tejpal Singh Vs. Aushim Khetarpal, filed under Section 138 read with Section 142 of N.I. Act.
2. Prayer in CRM-M-16341-2022 is for quashing of the order dated 16.03.2021 and the order dated 04.01.2022 passed by the trial Court, vide which non-bailable warrants have been issued against the petitioner in Criminal Complaint No.NACT 747 of 2020, registered on 14.01.2020, titled as Arminder Singh Vs. Aushim Khetarpal, filed under Section 138 read with Section 142 of N.I. Act.
3. Prayer in CRM-M-16397-2022 is for quashing of the order dated 16.03.2021 and the order dated 04.01.2022 passed by the trial Court, vide which non-bailable warrants have been issued against the petitioner in Criminal Complaint No.NACT 1154 of 2020, registered on 21.01.2020, titled as Ranjanpreet Kaur Vs. Aushim Khetarpal, filed under Section 138 read with Section 142 of N.I. Act.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner restricts his arguments to the extent that the petitioner is ready to surrender before the trial Court and apply for regular bail, as the offences are bailable. It is further submitted that since the petitioner is resident of Delhi, he has no local surety and he can furnish security bonds as per valuation certificate (Annexure P-5) regarding his residential house, therefore, the trial Court may be directed to accept the bail/security bonds in this regard.
5. Considering the limited prayer of the petitioner, all these three petitions are disposed of with a direction that in case the petitioner appears before the trial Court within a period of 15 days from today, the trial Court will not insist upon furnishing a local surety and will accept any other surety/security bonds, on the basis of property offered by the petitioner.
6. Disposed of, accordingly.
7. A photocopy of this order be placed on the files of other connected cases.
Order accordingly.
********