Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRM-M/37901/2026 of M/S ADVANCE TECHNOLOGICAL PRODUCTS Vs STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS on 15 July 2026
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA CHANDIGARH CRM-M-37901-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision: 15.07.2026 M/S ADVANCE TECHNOLOGICAL PRODUCTS …Petitioner V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL Present: Ms. Arushi Lamba, Advocate
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-37901-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision: 15.07.2026 M/S ADVANCE TECHNOLOGICAL PRODUCTS …Petitioner V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL Present: Ms. Arushi Lamba, Advocate and Mr. Vikram Singh Rana, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vikas Bhardwaj, AAG Haryana.
**** SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL
J. (Oral) The petition under Section 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeks following reliefs:
(i) direction to learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Faridabad to decide complaint case No. NACT/7667/2018 instituted on 04.07.2018, under Sections 138 and 148 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, in a time bound manner;
(ii) direction to learned trial Court to hear the aforesaid complaint case on day to day basis; Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner filed the aforesaid complaint before learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Faridabad in 2018. Respondent No. 3 faced trial and the case was at final stage of defence evidence. Despite multiple opportunities, the respondents failed to conclude defence evidence and were misleading the Court time and again. The complaint was pending for nearly 08 years. Therefore, learned trial Court be directed to conduct proceedings in the case on a day to day basis and decide the case in time bound manner. AJAY GOSWAMI 2026.07.16 11:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CRM-M-37901-2026 (O&M)
Vide order dated 10.03.2026 of this Court, orders dated 08.01.2026 and 06.02.2026 passed by learned trial Court closing defence evidence were set aside and the accused in the case were given liberty to lead and conclude defence evidence on 19.03.2026 and 20.03.2026. Thereafter, as is apparent from the daily orders passed by learned trial Court, the case is being adjourned by fixing short dates. Case was fixed for final arguments, for 21.04.2026, whereafer the matter was referred to mediation with consent of the petitioner. The case was then fixed for final arguments. Learned trial Court appears to be conscious about the age of the case and the statutory mandate of expeditious disposal. It does not appear that there is any delay on part of learned trial Court necessitating orders for time bound disposal. No orders for day to day hearing of the complaint should be passed, at the cost of other more important, old and pressing matters, which may be pending before the trial Court. The petition, therefore, stands disposed of. Pending CRM(s), if any, are also disposed of accordingly.
(SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL) 15.07.2026
JUDGE
Ajay Goswami Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No AJAY GOSWAMI 2026.07.16 11:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document