IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No. 2168 of 2004 Date of Decision: October 21, 2009 Prem Singh … Petitioner Versus State of Punjab … Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D. ANAND. Present : None for the petitioner. Mr. B.B.S. Teji, AAG, Punjab, S.D. Anand, J. This petition, which calls into question the validity of order dated25.09.2004, was for the year 2004 itself. Vide the impugned order, the learned Trial Judge declined a plea filed by the petitioner – accused for the forwarding of a fresh sample (to be taken out of the case property) to the Central Laboratory. The learned Trial Judge noticed that the case had already entered into defence evidence and that application did not deserve allowance as it had been filed at the fag end of the trial. Crl. Revision No. 2168 of 2004 It is apparent from the record that on February 14, 2005, a Coordinate Bench (Pritam Pal, J.) of this Court restrained the final pronouncement of the judgment. That order was vacated by another Co-ordinate Bench (Adrash Kumar Goel, J.) of this court on 22.09.2005. The vacation of that order came about as none entered appearance and it was pointed out to that Bench that the petitioner will have a remedy to challenge the impugned order at the time of final order itself. Today again, none has entered appearance on behalf of the petitioner. In view of the fact that the interim order had been vacated on 22.09.2005 and we are presently in the year 2009, it can safely be presumed that the trial itself must have concluded. There is no justification to adjourn this case for further consideration, particularly when none has opted to enter appearance on behalf of the petitioner today. The petition shall stand dismissed accordingly. The dismissal of the petition shall be communicated forthwith to the learned Trial Court. October 21, 2009 ( S.D. Anand ) vkd Judge 2