High CourtsSingle Bench

Ved Parkash and Another vs State of Haryana and Another

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 1 December 2010 · Citation: (2010) 12 P&H CK 0529

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rajan Gupta, J
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous No. M-32642 of 2010
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

3 paragraphs · 169 words

Rajan Gupta, J.—After arguing at some length, learned Counsel for the Petitioners submits that he may be allowed to withdrawthis petition with liberty to Petitioners to raise alltheir pleas before the trial court at an appropriate stage. He, however, submits that both the Petitioners are old andhave to be present in court on each and every date ofhearing. Thus, their personal appearance before the trialcourt may be exempted.

2.

In view of the statement made by learned Counselfor the Petitioners, this petition is dismissed aswithdrawn with liberty as aforesaid.

3.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, it isdirected that in case an application is moved before thetrial court for exemption from personal appearance of thePetitioners, the same shall be considered by the trialcourt in accordance with law. The trial court may exemptthe personal appearance of the Petitioners on such terms and conditions as it deems necessary. The Petitioners maybe allowed to appear through their counsel except on thedates when their presence before the trial court isabsolutely necessary.