CRIMINAL MISC. M NO.10324 OF 2008 :{ 1 }: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH DATE OF DECISION: DECEMBER 15, 2011 Vijay Lata .....Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana and others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? PRESENT: Mr. Ashwani Gaur, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Saurabh Mohunta, DAG, Haryana, for the State. Mr. Vikas Kumar, Advocate, for respondent Nos.2 to 5. **** RANJIT SINGH, J. The respondents were charge sheeted, against which they filed a revision before the Court of Sessions. The Sessions Court interfered with an order of framing charge against the respondents, except husband, Satya Parkash, and directed their discharge. This order is impugned by the complainant through the present petition under Section 482 CRIMINAL MISC. M NO.10324 OF 2008 :{ 2 }: Cr.P.C. Though revision against this order was also maintainable, but be that as it may, now asking the petitioner, at this stage, to go in for revision, would not be fair as this petition has remained pending before this Court since 2008. It is brought to my notice that during the pendency of this petition, the evidence has been recorded and the trial has almost been brought to a finality. This has happened primarily because order discharging the respondents as passed by the Court of Sessions, was stayed by this Court while issuing notice of motion. Once the evidence has now been recorded, it would not be fair to make comment on the order of discharge either way. Now the evidence is available before the trial Court. The Trial Court should consider the credibility of the evidence only and decide the case of each of the accused in the light of the evidence. Any observation made may lead to some prejudice either to the accused or to the complainant. The present petition is accordingly disposed of as no interference at this stage would be called for in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case. December 15, 2011 ( RANJIT SINGH ) khurmi JUDGE