Criminal Revision No. 3 of 2000 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh. 1. Criminal Revision No. 3 of 2000 Date of Decision: 28.01.2008. Mela Singh …Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent 2. Criminal Revision No. 4 of 2000 Pritpal Singh …Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent 3. Criminal Revision No. 5 of 2000 Rakesh Kumar …Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent 4. Criminal Revision No. 7 of 2000 Prem Chand …Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent Criminal Revision No. 3 of 2000 2 5. Criminal Revision No. 1589 of 1999 Jagdish Rai …Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent AND 6. Criminal Revision No. 1590 of 1999 Jagdish Rai …Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. Ashok Aggarwal and Mr. Navin Mahajan, Advocates for the petitioners. Mr. Mehardeep Singh, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, for the State. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) By this order, six criminal revisions bearing Nos. 3, 4, 5 & 7 of 2000 and 1589 & 1590 of 1999 will be decided together as they arise from case FIR No. 164 dated 24.9.1997 under Section 7 of Essential Commodities Act,, registered at Police Station Dirba. Mr. Mehardeep Singh, learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, appearing for the State has stated that trial is in progress and one witness has been recorded. Revisional Court will be hesitant to come to the rescue of the Criminal Revision No. 3 of 2000 3 petitioner, where trial is in progress. Mr. Ashok Aggarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that on merits he has got a very good case, even otherwise the trial Court could not take cognizance of the offence because no case has been made out against the petitioner. I am afraid to accept the contentions raised by learned counsel for the petitioner, once the trial is in progress, his arguments cannot be appreciated. However, liberty is granted to him to raise all the arguments before trial Court. Thus, no interference is called for in all the revision petitions. In view of the liberty granted, these revision petitions are disposed of. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge January 28, 2008 “DK”