AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard learned Counsel for the Appellant. Perused the material on record.
In the interest of justice, to provide fair opportunity to the Appellant, to settle the matter on merit, the delay in filing the Appeal (Execution) is condoned.
This Appeal (Execution) has been filed under Section 73 of the Act 2019 (corresponding Section 27A of the Act 1986) in challenge to the Order dated 27.01.2021 passed by the State Commission.
The impugned Order of the State Commission reads inter alia as below:
Today, neither judgment debtors No. 3 to 6 have appeared personally nor they appeared through video conferencing. As a coercive step, let the presence of judgment debtors No. 3 to 6 i.e. Sh. Pradeep Bansal, Sh. Yogesh Gauba, Sh. Sunil Mattoo and Sh. Mukul Aggarwal, be secured through non-bailable warrants of arrest for the next date of hearing.
A perusal of the State Commission's Order of 27.01.2021 shows that the State Commission has ordered for non-bailable warrants to be issued against the judgement debtors no. 3 to no. 6, including Yogesh Gauba, the Appellant herein.
It is evident that the State Commission has directed for the presence of Yogesh Gauba, one of the judgement debtors, to be secured through non-bailable warrant of arrest for the next date of hearing.
No error on the part of the State Commission is visible.
Trial of offence punishable under Section 72 of the Act 2019 (corresponding Section 27 of the Act 1986) has to be undertaken in accordance with Chapter XX Trial of Summons-Cases by Magistrates of the Cr.P.C. The procedure prescribed therein has to be followed by the State Commission.
The opportunity to offer his defence will be duly available to Yogesh Gauba, judgment debtor, in the trial to be conducted by the State Commission in accordance with the procedure laid down in the Cr.P.C.
Yogesh Gauba, judgment debtor, is required to dutifully and lawfully present himself before the State Commission, offer his defence, raise all his issues and contentions and make all his submissions (including those being made herein through the memorandum of appeal), before the State Commission, in the (lawful) conduct of the trial by the State Commission.
No ground is made out for interference by this Commission at this stage in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction under Section 73 of the Act 2019.
The Appeal (Execution) is dismissed.
This however does not curtail the right of the Appellant to challenge any subsequent order(s) made by the State Commission in the conduct of the trial for offence punishable under Section 27 of the Act 1986 (corresponding Section 72 of the Act 2019).
The Registrar is requested to ensure that the Registry sends a copy each of this Order to the Appellant and to its learned counsel today itself. The stenographer is requested to upload this Order on the website of this Commission today itself.