High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh
Case Law Search
na v. na - CRM-39685-m-2006  RD-P&H 8278 (10 October 2006)
Present: Mr. R.P. Dhir, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Amol Rattan Singh, Addl. A.G., Punjab.
Bail was earlier declined on 13.01.2006 having regard to the role attributed to the petitioner for allegedly causing injuries on the head which was dangerous to life.
It is now stated that, thereafter, more than nine months have passed and evidence of prosecution has still not been concluded. Reference is also made to orders passed by this Court on 8.9.2006 noticiing the stand on behalf of the State that evidence of prosecution was likely to be concluded within one month from that date and order dated 13.10.2006 that all the 10 remaining witnesses were likely to be examined on that date itself.
Learned counsel for the State submits that six witnesses remain to be examined and the case is fixed for 31.10.2006 for that purpose. According to him, the evidence of prosecution is likely to be concluded on that date or one more date which may be fixed by the trial Court on or before 15.11.2006.
In view of above, without expressing any opinion on the merits, the trial Court is directed to grant bail to the petitioner if prosecution evidence is not concluded upto 15.11.2006 for reasons not attributable to the petitioner.
The petition is disposed of.
October 18, 2006 (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL)
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.