COCP-1604-2025 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP-1604-2025 Decided on : 01.04.2025 Deepak Sandhu ...... Petitioner Versus Mrs. Anshu Shukla Ld. Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ambala ...... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL *** Present : Mr. Deepak Sandhu, petitioner in person. Mr. Preetinder Singh Ahluwalia, Advocate for the respondent. *** VIKRAM AGGARWAL , J (ORAL) The instant petition has been preferred by the petitioner (Deepak Sandhu) under Article 215 of the Constitution of India read with Section 2(b) & 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, alleging willful disobedience of the order dated 06.02.2025 (Annexure P-2), passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in CRM-M-6279-2025, titled as ‘Deepak Sandhu versus State of Haryana, by the respondent. 2. In brief, the facts, as emanating from the petition, are that a revision petition bearing CRR No.112 of 2024 was filed by the petitioner assailing the order dated 20.07.2024, passed by the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambala vide which the criminal complaint filed by the petitioner had been dismissed. Vide order dated 21.01.2025, the respondent, while functioning as MAMTA MALHOTRA 2025.04.03 18:30 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Chandigarh COCP-1604-2025 2 Additional Sessions Judge, Ambala ordered the issuance of notice to the respondents for 02.04.2025. The petitioner preferred CRM-M-6279 of 2025 (Annexure P-1), before this Court for issuance of directions to the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Ambala to comply with the order dated 21.01.2025 effectively and to issue summons to respondents No.1 and 22 therein who were residing in the United States of America. 3. The aforesaid petition was disposed of by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 06.02.2025 with an observation that necessary steps be taken in terms of order dated 21.01.2025 by the quarter concerned, as per law. 4. The petitioner has preferred the present contempt petition alleging willful disobedience of the aforesaid order dated 06.02.2025 stating that no action pursuant to the passing of the aforesaid order was taken by the respondent. 5. I have heard the petitioner who has appeared in person. 6. The petitioner has drawn the attention of the Court to the order dated 06.02.2025, passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court and documents Annexures P-3 and P-4 and has submitted that summons to respondents No.1 and 22 in the revision petition have deliberately not been issued despite specific directions having been passed by the Coordinate Bench on 06.02.2025. The petitioner has submitted that under the circumstances, the respondent has committed contempt of Court. 7. I have considered the submissions made by the petitioner and find that the present petition is premature, bereft of merit and an abuse of the process of law. 8. On a revision petition having been filed by the petitioner, the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ambala, passed the following order on MAMTA MALHOTRA 2025.04.03 18:30 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Chandigarh COCP-1604-2025 3 21.01.2025:- “Arguments heard on the request of revisionist with regard to issuing notice to the respondents as it is not dispute fact that petition under Section 397 Cr.P.C. read with Section 401 Cr.P.C. even in the case law i.e. Manharibhai Muljibhai Kakadia and another Versus Shaileshbhai Mohanbhai Patel and others, 2012(4) RCR(Criminal) 689; Subhash Sahebrao Deshmukh Versus Satish Atmaram Talekar & Ors. DOJ: 18.06.2020, Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh Judgment. Harinder Singh Versus Rajinder Singh CRR-800-200 (O&M) DOJ: 20.11.2023, now it is mandatory to issue the notice to the respondents From the above ratio of law, now it is mandatory to issue notice to the respondents for appearing before court in person or through their counsel. Now notice be issued to the respondents for 02.04.2025 on filing of PF, copies etc. Applications (IA No.01 & IA No.02 of 2024) are disposed of accordingly.” 9. Seemingly unsatisfied, the petitioner knocked the doors of this Court by way of CRM-M-6279-2025 which was disposed of by a Coordinate Bench of this Court on 06.02.2025; “Present petition has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, 'BNSS'), for issuance of directions to the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Ambala to comply with the order dated 21.01.2025 (P-2), effectively and send summons to respondents no.1 as well as 22, who are residing in United States of America (U.S.A.). 2. After hearing the petitioner and upon perusal of paper book, present petition is disposed off with an observation that necessary steps be taken in terms of order dated 21.01.2025 (supra) by the quarter concerned, as per law. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off.” MAMTA MALHOTRA 2025.04.03 18:30 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Chandigarh COCP-1604-2025 4 10. The order dated 21.01.2025 shows that notice was issued to the respondents in the revision petition for 02.04.2025. Directions were issued by the Coordinate Bench of this Court on 06.02.2025. Thereafter, the matter has not been taken up by the Court of learned Additional District Judge as the date fixed is 02.04.2025. No doubt, the report of the Ahlmad to the Court concerned states that summons could not be issued to respondents No.1 and 22 through the Process Serving Agency as they are residents of USA and under the circumstances, service can only be effected through the concerned Embassy. However, this report shall be put up before the Court concerned on the date fixed i.e. 02.04.2025 and appropriate orders in accordance with law shall be passed. 11. By no stretch of imagination, can any disobedience much less willful disobedience be said to have been committed by the respondent of the order dated 06.02.2025 passed by the Coordinate Bench. That being so, the present petition is not only premature but is also apparently an abuse of the process of law. Without commenting any further on the said issue, the instant petition is found to be bereft of merit and is accordingly dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of accordingly. (VIKRAM AGGARWAL) JUDGE 01.04.2025 mamta Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No MAMTA MALHOTRA 2025.04.03 18:30 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Chandigarh