IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-29530 of 2008 Date of decision: 29th April, 2009 M/s Hansa Tools & Forgings Pvt. Ltd. and another … Petitioners Versus Union of India and others … Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: None for the petitioners. Mr. Gaganinder Singh, Advocate with Mr. D.D. Sharma, Advocate for the respondents. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) In the present case, notice of motion was issued by a Coordinate Bench on 11th November, 2008 and it was noticed in the order that petitioner has deposited total amount of penalty, being Rs.1,20,000/-. Thereafter, another Coordinate Bench, on 8th December, 2008 passed the following order: “Learned counsel for the respondents seeks an adjournment. Adjourned to 16.2.2009. In the meantime, learned counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners be allowed to join the proceedings. The proceedings are continuing and the matter is fixed for 15.12.2008. Learned counsel for the petitioners has pointed out that the impugned order, per se, is contrary to the mandate provided under section 82, Code of Criminal Procedure, in so Criminal Misc. No. M-29530 of 2008 much as 30 days from the date of publication of proclamation were required to be given. De-hors the provisions, the order indicates (para-13 of the petition) that the petitioner was required to appear on 9.10.2007 under publication dated 1.10.2007. Without making any observation on the merits of the case, it is directed that the petitioners shall be allowed to join the proceedings. The petitioners shall not be taken in custody.” Case was adjourned to 16th February, 2009 and then to 25th February, 2009. Nobody appeared on behalf of the petitioner on March 3, 2009 and on 28th April, 2009. Today also, nobody is present on behalf of the petitioner. Mr. D.D. Sharma appearing for the respondents has submitted that in pursuance of order dated 8th December, 2008, petitioner is regularly appearing before the trial Court and the trial is in progress. He has further stated that amount of penalty has been deposited. In the present case, nobody is causing appearance on behalf of the petitioner. Therefore, it can be safely inferred that petitioner no longer want to persist with his prayer of quashing the order (Annexure P- 7), whereby notice of accusation was served and petitioner was declared Proclaimed Offender. At the same time, taking into consideration submissions made by counsel for the respondents that petitioner is appearing before the trial Court regularly in compliance with order dated 8th December, 2008 passed by a Coordinate Bench, present petition is disposed off with a direction that let the petitioner continue to appear before the trial Court and trial be concluded in accordance with provisions of law. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE April 29, 2009 rps 2