Criminal Misc. No. M-20140 v. State of Punjab

Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present Mr. Gorav Kathuria, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. K.D.Sachdeva, Addl. A.G., Punjab, for the State. VIJENDER SINGH MALIK, J. Gupinder Kumar alias Gopi seeks regular bail in a case registered by way of FIR No. 247 dated 3.9.2010 at Police Station Sadar, District Amritsar for an offence punishable under sections 148, 307, 323, 324, 326 read with section 149 of Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner made his submissions, some on merits and some on the delay in the conclusion of the trial. Learned State counsel has submitted that after dismissal of the earlier petition of the petitioner for regular bail by this court, the petitioner filed SLP (Crl.) No. 1209 of 2012 seeking regular bail, which was dismissed by Hon`ble Supreme Court of India. According to him, in Crl. Misc. No.M-20140 of 2012 2 .. these circumstances, this petition merits dismissal with costs. Learned counsel for the petitioner did not deny the fact that the petitioner had unsuccessfully approached Hon`ble Supreme Court of India for grant of bail after dismissal of his earlier petition by this court. In the face of these circumstances, the petition requires to be dismissed with costs. However, one fact has to be kept in mind and the same is that the complainant is not coming forward for his evidence. No evidence has been recorded by the trial court after dismissal of his petition for bail. Keeping in view these circumstances, there being no change in the fact situation of the case, the petition is dismissed. However, keeping in view the period that has elapsed since the framing of charge, learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial by taking effective steps to secure the presence of the complainant and other unexamined witnesses. August 28th , 2012 (VIJENDER SINGH MALIK) JUDGE