Crl.Rev. No.2620 of 2010 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.Rev. No.2620 of 2010 (O&M) Decided on: September 27, 2010. Sham Lal .. Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana .. Respondent * * * CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.S.BEDI * * * PRESENT Ms.Maninder Kaur, Advocate, for Mr.G.S.Sandhu, Advocate, for the petitioner. M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) After hearing the counsel for the petitioner and going through the interim orders passed by the trial Court indicating that PW Gurmeet Singh along with another witness was called by bailable warrants for 08.05.2010, it appears that a fair opportunity has not been given to the prosecution to examine a witness whose evidence is essential for the just decision of the case. As PW Gurmeet Singh is an official witness, his statement seems to be necessary to arrive at a just conclusion whether any mischief had been caused by diminution of supply of water for agricultural purposes was committed. . . . 1 Crl.Rev. No.2620 of 2010 (O&M) It is apparent that vide order dated 01.04.2010, bailable warrants issued against PW Gurmeet Singh were received back unexecuted as such, fresh bailable warrants in the sum of Rs.5,000/- was issued for service of said Gurmeet Singh for 08.05.2010. On 08.05.2010, without making any reference to the report on bailable warrants, the evidence of the prosecution was closed. It appears that statement of Gurmeet Singh is necessary for the just decisin of the case as it is a case under Section 430 IPC in which he being an oficial witnesses, his statement appears to be necessary to arrive at a conclusion whether there had been any diminution of the supply of water for agricultural purposes as alleged by the prosecution. This petition is disposed of setting aside the order dated 08.05.2010, closing the evidence of the prosecution with a direction to the trial Court to exercise powers under Sections 311 Cr.P.C. and issue fresh bailable warrants for Gurmeet Singh and examine him in accordance with law. However, it is made clear that in case for any reason, ultimately, it is found that Gurmeet Singh cannot be produced, it will be open to the trial Court to pass any appropriate order in accordance with law. It will be the duty of the prosecution agency to produce the said witness within a period of not beyond the period of two months (M.M.S.BEDI) JUDGE September 27, 2010. rka . . . 2