CRM-M-25654 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 118 Ved Singh Beniwal Devender Singh Coram : Present: Rajesh Bhardwaj, J. (Oral) CRM-31570 record. CRM-N-25654 1. BNSS, 2023, is for quashing the impugned orders dated 03.10.2024 (Annexures P Hisar, in CRR learned trial Court to comply with the judgment dated 27.02.2013, along with all subsequent proceedings emanating thereup including warrant of arrest. 2. were filed against the petitioner 25654-2025 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Ved Singh Beniwal Versus Devender Singh Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj Mr. Aman Redhu, Advocate, for the petitioner. **** Rajesh Bhardwaj, J. (Oral) 31570-2025 Application is allowed, as prayed for. The documents marked as Annexures P 25654-2025 Prayer in the present petition, filed under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023, is for quashing the impugned orders dated 03.10.2024 (Annexures P-1 and P-2) passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar, in CRR-240-2017 and CRR-241-2017 vide which it had directed the learned trial Court to comply with the judgment dated 27.02.2013, along with all subsequent proceedings emanating thereup including warrant of arrest. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that two complaints were filed against the petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable - 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-25654-2025 (O&M) Decided on:18.08.2025 ...Petitioner ...Respondent Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj Application is allowed, as prayed for. The documents marked as Annexures P-13 to P-17 are taken on Prayer in the present petition, filed under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023, is for quashing the impugned orders dated 03.10.2024 learned Additional Sessions Judge, 2017 vide which it had directed the learned trial Court to comply with the judgments of conviction and sentence dated 27.02.2013, along with all subsequent proceedings emanating thereupon, Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that two complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable ...Petitioner ...Respondent 17 are taken on Prayer in the present petition, filed under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023, is for quashing the impugned orders dated 03.10.2024 learned Additional Sessions Judge, 2017 vide which it had directed the of conviction and sentence on, Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that two complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable VINOD KUMAR 2025.08.20 18:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-25654 Instruments Act, 1881, pay double the amount of both the cheques He submits that one of the cheques was of Rs.3 was of Rs.2,82,000/ upheld by the Appellate Court dismissing the appeal of the trial Court as well as of the Appellate Court were assailed by the petitioner before this Court by way of filing revision same were also dismissed. Court before No(s).720 of 2017 arising out of SLP (Crl.) No(s).2293/2017, wherein the Supreme Court awarded to the petitioner in two cases will run concurrently and the amount of both the cheques of Rs.5,82,000/ Hon’ble the Supreme Court, the complainant. He further submits that the petitioner has already suffered the sentence awarded and the sentence awarded in default as well. It is submitted that now the complainant has initiated ano amount. 3. that no amount is liable to be paid by the petitioner to the complainant as he had already suffered the sentence and the principal amount of had already been paid, which was deposited by the petitioner before the Supreme Court. He fairly submits before this Court that the Appellate Court has only remanded the case to the trial Court who has issued non 25654-2025 (O&M) Instruments Act, 1881, in which the learned Court had directed the petitioner to y double the amount of both the cheques He submits that one of the cheques was of Rs.3 ,82,000/-. The judgments passed by the learned trial Court were upheld by the Appellate Court vide its judgments dated 26.02.2014 while dismissing the appeals filed by the petitioner. of the trial Court as well as of the Appellate Court were assailed by the petitioner before this Court by way of filing revision same were also dismissed. The petitioner assailed the order(s) passed by this Court before Hon’ble the Supreme Court by way of filing Criminal Appeal No(s).720 of 2017 arising out of SLP (Crl.) No(s).2293/2017, wherein upreme Court vide order dated 13.04.2017 awarded to the petitioner in two cases will run concurrently and the amount of both the cheques of Rs.5,82,000/-, which was deposited by the petitioner the Supreme Court, was remitted to the trial Court for its disbursal to the complainant. He further submits that the petitioner has already suffered the sentence awarded and the sentence awarded in default as well. It is submitted that now the complainant has initiated another proceedings for recovery of the Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that that no amount is liable to be paid by the petitioner to the complainant as he already suffered the sentence and the principal amount of had already been paid, which was deposited by the petitioner before the Supreme Court. He fairly submits before this Court that the Appellate Court has only remanded the case to the trial Court who has issued non - 2 - in which the learned Court had directed the petitioner to vide judgments dated 27.02.2013 He submits that one of the cheques was of Rs.3,00,000/-, whereas the another The judgments passed by the learned trial Court were vide its judgments dated 26.02.2014 while filed by the petitioner. It is submitted that the judgments of the trial Court as well as of the Appellate Court were assailed by the petitioner before this Court by way of filing revision petitions; however, the The petitioner assailed the order(s) passed by this the Supreme Court by way of filing Criminal Appeal No(s).720 of 2017 arising out of SLP (Crl.) No(s).2293/2017, wherein Hon’ble vide order dated 13.04.2017 had directed that the sentence awarded to the petitioner in two cases will run concurrently and the amount of , which was deposited by the petitioner with was remitted to the trial Court for its disbursal to the complainant. He further submits that the petitioner has already suffered the sentence awarded and the sentence awarded in default as well. It is submitted ther proceedings for recovery of the Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that that no amount is liable to be paid by the petitioner to the complainant as he already suffered the sentence and the principal amount of both the cheques had already been paid, which was deposited by the petitioner before the Supreme Court. He fairly submits before this Court that the Appellate Court has only remanded the case to the trial Court who has issued non-bailable in which the learned Court had directed the petitioner to vide judgments dated 27.02.2013. other The judgments passed by the learned trial Court were vide its judgments dated 26.02.2014 while judgments of the trial Court as well as of the Appellate Court were assailed by the however, the The petitioner assailed the order(s) passed by this the Supreme Court by way of filing Criminal Appeal Hon’ble had directed that the sentence awarded to the petitioner in two cases will run concurrently and the amount of with was remitted to the trial Court for its disbursal to the complainant. He further submits that the petitioner has already suffered the sentence awarded and the sentence awarded in default as well. It is submitted ther proceedings for recovery of the Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that that no amount is liable to be paid by the petitioner to the complainant as he both the cheques had already been paid, which was deposited by the petitioner before the Supreme Court. He fairly submits before this Court that the Appellate Court bailable VINOD KUMAR 2025.08.20 18:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-25654 warrants for before the trial Court; however, his arrest may be stayed during the pendency of the proceedings before the trial Court. 4. the petitioner to be reasonable and, thus, allows the petitioner to withdraw this petition, with liberty to approach the trial Court for a decision afresh, as directed by the Appellate Court vide its order dated 03.10.2024. However, the petitioner is allow trial Court shall admit him to bail to its satisfaction. 5. August 18, 2025 vinod* 25654-2025 (O&M) for the petitioner. He submits that the petitioner is ready to appear before the trial Court; however, his arrest may be stayed during the pendency of the proceedings before the trial Court. This Court finds the submissions made by the learned counsel for he petitioner to be reasonable and, thus, allows the petitioner to withdraw this petition, with liberty to approach the trial Court for a decision afresh, as directed by the Appellate Court vide its order dated 03.10.2024. However, the petitioner is allowed to appear before the trial Court and on his appearance, the trial Court shall admit him to bail to its satisfaction. Petition stands dismissed as withdrawn, with the liberty aforesaid. , 2025 Whether Speaking/Reasoned: Whether Reportable: - 3 - He submits that the petitioner is ready to appear before the trial Court; however, his arrest may be stayed during the pendency This Court finds the submissions made by the learned counsel for he petitioner to be reasonable and, thus, allows the petitioner to withdraw this petition, with liberty to approach the trial Court for a decision afresh, as directed by the Appellate Court vide its order dated 03.10.2024. However, the ed to appear before the trial Court and on his appearance, the trial Court shall admit him to bail to its satisfaction. Petition stands dismissed as withdrawn, with the liberty aforesaid. (Rajesh Bhardwaj) Judge Whether Speaking/Reasoned: NO/YES NO/YES He submits that the petitioner is ready to appear before the trial Court; however, his arrest may be stayed during the pendency This Court finds the submissions made by the learned counsel for he petitioner to be reasonable and, thus, allows the petitioner to withdraw this petition, with liberty to approach the trial Court for a decision afresh, as directed by the Appellate Court vide its order dated 03.10.2024. However, the ed to appear before the trial Court and on his appearance, the Petition stands dismissed as withdrawn, with the liberty aforesaid. VINOD KUMAR 2025.08.20 18:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document