IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM NO___________2023
IN
CRM-A 98-MA-2016
Baby …Applicant/appellant
Versus
Kanta Rani & Others … Respondents
INDEX
Sr. Particulars Dated Pages Court
No. Fee
1. Application U/O 1 R 10 read with 08.08.2023 01-05
Section 151 of CPC
2. Affidavit in support 06-09
3. Application U/S 151 CPC 08.08.2023 10-22
4. Affidavit in support 23
5. Amended Memo Of Parties 08.08.2023 24
Annexure:-
A-1 Hon’ble High Court Order 10.02.2023 25-28
A-2 Adhar card of Applicants
6. Power of Attorney 08.08.2023 29
Total Court Fee____________/-
Note: 1. Advance copy has been supplied to A.G. Punjab
CHANDIGARH (NISHARANA) (MITULSINGH RANA)
DATED 08.08.2023 PH-4681/2021 PH 3188/2019
NOR PH223404
ADVOCATES
COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANTS
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM NO___________2023
IN
CRM-A 98-MA-2016
Baby …Applicant/appellant
Versus
Kanta Rani & Others … Respondents
COURT FEE of RS.
CHANDIGARH (NISHARANA) (MITULSINGH RANA)
DATED 08.08.2023 PH-4681/2021 PH 3188/2019
NOR PH223404
ADVOCATES
COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANTS
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM NO___________2023
IN
CRM-A 98-MA-2016
Baby …Applicant/appellant
Versus
Kanta Rani & Others … Respondents
Application under section 482 CrPC for
impleading the applicants as LR’s of the
Appellant in the Criminal appeal, in the interest
of justice.
***
RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
1. That the above mentioned appeal was dismissed as withdrawn on
dated 10.02.2023.
2. That the Baby Appellant was expired on 25.12.2020 and the death
certificate of the Baby is annexed as Annexure A-1 during the
pendency of the appeal and followings are his legal representative:-
I. Anuradha D/o Madan Lal, R/o H. No. 733, near Amrik singh
road Arya Nagar Bathinda Punjab 151001.
II. Raj Kumar S/o Madan Lal, R/o H. No. 733, near Amrik singh
road Arya Nagar Bathinda Punjab 151001 and the Adhar card
annexed as Annexure A-2.
3. That beside the above mentioned legal representative, there are no
other legal representative of the deceased Baby.
4. That in the aforementioned background, it would be required to
implead the legal representative of the original Appellants to allow
them to pursue the appeal before this Hon’ble Court.
5. That there are no other legal representative of Appellants/ Applicants
except as mentioned above.
6. That it is, therefore, in the interest of justice that the above
mentioned legal representative be impleaded as respondent to
contest the present CRM-A as legal representative of
Appellants/Applicants.
7. That the present CRM application has been drafted after ascertaining
up-to date memo of parties from registry and the Amended Memo of
Parties is attached herewith.
8. That the certified copies of the Annexures are not readily available
with the Appellants/Applicants. However ,the true
typed/translated/photo copies of the same are being attached
herewith.
9. That the Appellants/Applicants have not filed any such or similar
petition either in this Hon’ble Court or in the Hon’ble Supreme Court
of India nor is pending before any Ld. Session Court.
10. That it is necessary to bring on record the legal representative of
Baby, deceased for proper adjudication of the case.
11. That the amended memo of party has been prepared after verifying
up to date memo of party from the registry.
PRAYER
It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this application may Kindly
be allowed and the above mentioned legal representative mentioned
in para 2 above of the application be implemented as appellant, in
the interest of justice.
OR
It is also, further prayer that the Appellants may kindly be exempted
for filing the certified copy of Annexures in the interest of justice.
However, true translation / true photocopy same are being attached
for the king of perusal of the Hon’ble High Court.
Note:
1. Affidavit is attached.
2. Complete amended Memo of Parties is attached, as per
record.
CHANDIGARH (NISHARANA) (MITULSINGH RANA)
DATED 08.08.2023 PH-4681/2021 PH 3188/2019
NOR PH223404
ADVOCATES
COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANTS
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM NO___________2023
IN
CRM-A 98-MA-2016
Baby …Applicant/appellant
Versus
Kanta Rani & Others … Respondents
Affidavit of Anuradha D/o Madan Lal, R/o H. No. 733, near
Amrik singh road Arya Nagar Bathinda Punjab 151001
I, the above named deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and declare
as under:-
1. That the above mentioned appeal was dismissed as withdrawn on dated
10.02.2023.
2. That the Baby Appellant was expired on 25.12.2020 and the death
certificate of the Baby is annexed as Annexure A-1 during the pendency
of the appeal and followings are his legal representative:-
i> Anuradha D/o Madan Lal, R/o H. No. 733, near Amrik
singh road Arya Nagar Bathinda Punjab 151001.
ii> Raj Kumar S/o Madan Lal, R/o H. No. 733, near Amrik
singh road Arya Nagar Bathinda Punjab 151001 and the
Adhar card of the Gumit Singh annexed as Annexure A-
2 and A-3.
3. That beside the above mentioned legal representative, there are no other
legal representative of the deceased Baby.
4. That in the aforementioned background, it would be required to implead
the legal representative of the original Appellants to allow them to
pursue the appeal before this Hon’ble Court.
5. That there are no other legal representative of Appellants/ Applicants
except as mentioned above.
6. That it is, therefore, in the interest of justice that the above mentioned
legal representative be impleaded as respondent to contest the present
CRM-A as legal representative of Appellants/Applicants.
7. That the present CRM application has been drafted after ascertaining up-to
date memo of parties from registry and the Amended Memo of Parties is
attached herewith.
8. That the certified copies of the Annexures are not readily available with the
Appellants/Applicants. However ,the true typed/translated/photo copies
of the same are being attached herewith.
9. That the Appellants/Applicants have not filed any such or similar petition
either in this Hon’ble Court or in the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India nor
is pending before any Ld. Session Court.
10. That it is necessary to bring on record the legal representative of Baby,
deceased for proper adjudication of the case.
11. That the amended memo of party has been prepared after verifying up to
date memo of party from the registry.
Chandigarh, Deponent
Dated:10.08.2016 (Surinder Kumar Bansal)
Verification: Verified that the contents of para no. 1 to 9 of the above
affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge. No part of it is false and
nothing has been kept concealed therein.
Chandigarh, Deponent
Dated:10.08.2016 (Surinder Kumar Bansal)
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM NO___________2023
IN
CRM-A 98-MA-2016
Baby …Applicant/appellant
Versus
Kanta Rani & Others … Respondents
Application under section 482 CrPC for
recalling/modification of the order dated
10.02.2023 Annexure A-1 to the extent it affects
the rights of the applicants/appellant, in the
interest of justice.
RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
1. That the above mentioned appeal was dismissed as withdrawn on
dated 10.02.2023.
2. That the applicants are seeking recalling/ modification of the order
dated 10.02.2023 passed by this Hon’ble Court in the above said
CRM-A-98 MA 2016
3. That the applicants is the legal heirs of the appellant. Thus, the
applicants are also affected by the order dated10.02.2023.
4. That the facts of the case are complainant filed the criminal appeal
against the order of acquittal passed by the Ld. Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Bathinda gravely erred on facts as well as in law while
passing the impugned judgment whereby the accused-respondents
No.1 to 4 (for brevity 'accused) have been acquitted from the
charges levelled against them under Section 452,323,506,148,149 of
the Indian Penal Code, which was registered as Criminal complaint
No. 394 dated 19.09.2007.
5. That tersely stated the facts are that the appellant is residing in
house N733 Amrik Singh Road Bathinda along with her family as a
tenant under respondent No l and 2 who are the owners in question
Rs 50/- per month for the last few years i.e 34 years the amount of
rent has been enhanced to the tune of Rs 250/- per month and the
complainant is regular paying the amount of rent. That the accused
wanted to disposses the complainant and her family from the
tenanted house illegally and forcibly for which the applicant
complainant filed a suit for permanent injunction against the
respondent No l and 2 in the court of Nirmal Singh Additional Civil
Judge 1SrDivisionlBathinda The respondent also flled an application
Uls 13 of the east Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act against the
complainant for the eviction of the complainant from the house in
questionin the court of Nirmal SinghLearned Rent Controller Bathinda
6 That the respondent No 3 and 4 are daughters of respondent No l
and aU the aforesaid respondents in collusion and connlvance with
two unknown persons in order to take illegal and forcible possession
of the house in questiond espite of the fact that litigation was
pending between both the parties111 regard to house in question 7
That on 31082007 at about 11 AM the co alongwith her daughter
were present in the house in dispute when all the respondents
forcibly entered the house of the appellant and threatened the
appellant to vacate the house in question within two hours otherwise
they shall forcibly remove her household articles out of the house
Respondent No 3 and 4 also abused the appellant and threatened
that they will be eliminated if the house in question1S not vacated
However the complainant reported the matter to the police of PS
Kotwali Bathinda regarding the said occurrence on 31 082007 but
the police did not took any action against the respondents rather the
appellant was threatened by the police to vacate the house as the
respondents were influential persons and had already approached
the police 8 That thereafter in the evening when the appellant after
putting the lock on the main order of the house had gone to the
market and in her absence the respondent No 1 to 4 along with two
unknown
6. persons came there and broke open the lock of the house for taking
illegal and forcible possession of the house but they could not
succeed due to the timely intervention of the neighbors after which
the respondents fled away from the spot. The complainant when
came back from the market came to know about the abovesaid
incident and on 01.09.2007, she moved an application to the SSP,
Bathinda against the accused persons but the police did not took any
action against the respondents rather the respondents were only
challaned under section 107 and 151 of Cr.P.C. despite of the fact
that they have committed an offence under Section 452, 506, 148
and 149 of IPC. That on 17.09.2007 at about 8 AM, when the
complainant was alone in the house and her daughter had gone to
market, the aforesaid persons came to the house of the appellant,
thereafter, respondent No.1 and 2 caught hold the appellant from
her arms, while respondent No. 3 and 4 gave slaps on face of
appellant, then respondents gave kick blow on right leg of the
appellant and respondents gave a blow in the stomach of the
appellant. The appellant started making hue and cry and said "marta
marta" after which the neighbors gathered there and in the
meantime daughter of the appellant also came back from the
market, thereafter, the respondents fled from the spot and while
leaving, they again threatened the appellant with dire consequences
and as such the appellant is apprehending danger to her life and
property at the hands of the accused persons.
7. That during the pendency of the Criminal appeal vide appeal no
CRM-A 98-MA 2016. The complainant died during the pendency of
the appeal and court been futile to serve her justice. And the counsel
of the appellant were without contacting to the LR’S of the
complainant withdrawal the above said appeal on dated 10.02.2023.
8. That the applicants are the daughter and son of the appellant and
after get to know about the dismissal of the appeal without there
knowledge. Now for the justice for her mother they want to pursue
the same appeal on merits.
9. That no such or similar application for recalling/modification has
earlier been filed by the applicants either in this Hon’ble Court or in
Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.
10. That the above mentioned grounds are sufficient for
recalling/modification the order dated 10.02.2023
PRAYER
In view of the submissions made hereinbefore, it is most respectfully
prayed that the present application may kindly be allowed and the order
dated 10.02.2023 passed by this Hon’ble Court may kindly be
recalled/modified in view of the facts and circumstances enumerated in the
present application.
CHANDIGARH (NISHARANA) (MITULSINGH RANA)
DATED 08.08.2023 PH-4681/2021 PH 3188/2019
NOR PH223404
ADVOCATES
COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM NO___________2023
IN
CRM-A 98-MA-2016
Baby …Applicant/appellant
Versus
Kanta Rani & Others … Respondents
Affidavit of Anuradha D/o Madan Lal, R/o H. No. 733, near
Amrik singh road Arya Nagar Bathinda Punjab 151001.
I, the above named deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and declare
as under:-
1. That the deponent is filing the accompanying application for
recalling/modifying the order dated 10.02.2023 passed by this
Hon’ble Court in the above said CRM-A
2. That the accompanying application for recalling/modification has
been drafted by the counsel for the deponent as per their
instructions. The deponent is well conversant with the facts of the
case. The averments made in the application are true and correct to
my knowledge. No part of it is false and nothing material has been
kept concealed therein.
3. That the deponent have not earlier filed any such application for
recalling/modification for the same cause of action.
Chandigarh, Deponent
Dated:
Verification: Verified that the contents of para no. 1 to 3 of the above
affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge. No part of it is false and
nothing has been kept concealed therein.
Chandigarh, Deponent
Dated:
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-A 98-MA-2016
AMENDED MEMO OF PARTIES
Baby Wife of Madan Lal through its Lrs
1. Anuradha D/o Madan Lal son of Sh. Jeewan Lal,
2. Raj Kumar S/o Madan Lal son of Sh. Jeewan Lal,
All the Appellants are resident of H.No.733, Amrik Singh Road, Arya Nagar,
Gali No.2 Bhatinda
…..Appellant
Versus
1. Kanta Rani wife of Sh. Mohan Lal, resident of H.No.750, Gali No.2,
Arya Nagar, Amrik Singh Rad, Gali No.2, Bathinda.
2. Banwari Lal son of Sh. Jagat Ram S/o Shaunki Ram, R/o Sidhu Nagri,
Street No.2, Abohar, Distt. Ferozepur. Rekha, daughter of Sh. Mohan
Lal S/o Sh. Darbar Chand, resident of H.No.750, St. No.2, Arya
Nagar, Amrik Singh Road, Gali No.2, Bhatinda
3. Kaku @Preeti, daughter of Sh. Mohan Lal S/o Sh. Darbar Chand,
resident of H.No.750, St. No.2 Arya Nagar, Amrik Singh Road, Gali
No.2, Bhatinda.
4. Babbu son of unknown resident of Bhatinda
5. Robi son of unknown resident of Bhatinda
CHANDIGARH (NISHARANA) (MITULSINGH RANA)
DATED 08.08.2023 PH-4681/2021 PH 3188/2019
NOR PH223404
ADVOCATES
COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER
