Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRM-M/41134/2026 of JAGJEET SINGH @ LADDI @ JATINDER SINGH Vs STATE OF HARYANA on 28 July 2026
THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.41134 of 2026 Date of Decision:- 28.07.2026 Jagjeet Singh @ Laddi @ Jatinder Singh …..Petitioner. Versus State of Haryana .....Respondent. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL ***** Present:- Mr. Karandeep Singh
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
129
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M No.41134 of 2026 Date of Decision:- 28.07.2026
Jagjeet Singh @ Laddi @ Jatinder Singh …..Petitioner. Versus State of Haryana .....Respondent.
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL ***** Present:- Mr. Karandeep Singh Sidhu, Advocate
for the petitioner.
VIKRAM AGGARWAL, J. (ORAL)
Prayer in the present petition preferred under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘the BNSS’) is for issuance of a direction to the trial Court to conclude the trial of the case bearing FIR No.51 dated 13.01.2017 under Section 420 IPC and Section 13 of the Protection of Interests of Depositors (Financial Establish.) Act, 1999, registered at Police Station Jind City, District Jind, in a time bound manner.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the FIR in question was registered on 13.01.2017 and after submission of the final report, charges were framed on 31.08.2024 but despite almost two years having passed even after framing of charges, not even a single prosecution witness has been examined. He, therefore, prays that a direction be issued to the Court concerned for expeditious and time bound disposal of the case.
3. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel YAG DUTT 2026.07.29 13:09 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.
CRM-M No.41134 of 2026 -2-
for the petitioner.
4. A perusal of the interlocutory orders placed on record shows that no doubt, charges were framed as far back as on 31.08.2024. However, on all subsequent dates, either no prosecution witness was present or the petitioner was not produced by the jail authority before the trial Court.
5. Expeditious trial is a valuable right which should have been kept in mind by the trial Court as well while granting frequent adjournments on the ground of non-production of the petitioner by the jail authority. The trial Court should also kept in mind the provisions of the BNSS in such cases, wherein even in the absence of an accused, the trial can proceed.
6. Having examined the matter in its totality and being conscious of the fact that Courts are already having a huge pendency of cases but at the same time are expected to expeditiously deal with matters, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the Court concerned where case arising out of bearing FIR No.51 dated 13.01.2017 under Section 420 IPC and Section 13 of the Protection of Interests of Depositors (Financial Establish.) Act, 1999, registered at Police Station Jind City, District Jind, is pending to make concerted efforts to expeditiously conclude the trial in the aforesaid case.
(VIKRAM AGGARWAL) July 28, 2026
JUDGE Yag Dutt
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether Reportable: Yes/No YAG DUTT 2026.07.29 13:09 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.