IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH C.R. No.6845 of 2006 Date of decision February 23, 2007 Duman Singh .......Petitioner Versus Samitter Singh and others ........Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEY MITTAL Present:- Sh. Ramesh Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Sh. G.S. Sandhawalia, Advocate for respondents No.1 and 2. **** Viney Mittal, J (Oral) The application for additional evidence moved by the applicants has been rejected by the trial Court. It has been observed by the trial Court that a certified copy of the jamabandi for the year 1999-2000 had already been tendered in evidence. It has also been noticed that the observations made by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kapurthala in an application moved by defendant No.1 seeking anticipatory bail are irrelevant. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I find that the observations made by trial Court are absolutely justified and no interference of this Court is called for. Dismissed. (VINEY MITTAL) JUDGE February 23, 2007 archana