In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ...... Criminal Misc. No.M-36846 of 2010 ..... Date of decision:22.2.2011 Iqbal Singh .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab .....Respondent .... Present: Mr. Simranjit Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. V.P.S. Sidhu, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State. Mr. Vipin Mahajan, Advocate for the complainant. ..... S.S. Saron, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner prays for regular bail in a case registered against him on 4.5.2009 for the offences under Sections 302 and 120-B IPC. The FIR in the case has been registered on the statement of Jaswinder Singh, who is brother of the petitioner Iqbal Singh. As per the prosecution case, Iqbal Singh and his younger brother Paramjit Singh murdered their father by putting a `Parna' around his neck and strangulating him. Jaswinder Singh, the brother of Paramjit Singh and Iqbal Singh has lodged the FIR. He has appeared as PW-1 before the trial Court on 23.12.2010 and his examination-in-chief has been recorded. The cross- examination of Jaswinder Singh has been deferred on the request of the Cr. Misc. No.M-36846 of 2010 [2] learned counsel for the defence. According to the learned counsel for the complainant, the defence counsel is not cross-examining Jaswinder Singh- complainant (PW-1) and two adjournments have been taken. The bail application of Paramjit Singh has been dismissed by this Court on 10.3.2010, however, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is in custody for the last 15 months and the trial in the case is not making any progress. Indeed in the trial of the case only one PW has been recorded till date. Both learned counsel for the State and the complainant submitted that it is due to the defence counsel who has been taking adjournments. Be that as it may, keeping in view the allegations that the petitioner along with his brother Paramjit Singh is said to have murdered their father Swaran Singh and their other brother Jaswinder Singh has supported the case, no ground for grant of bail is made out at this stage. However, the petitioner is in custody for the last more than 17 months, therefore, it would be just and expedient if the trial Court takes effective steps to dispose of the case expeditiously. The prosecution shall ensure that its witnesses are present on the dates fixed before the trial Court. In the circumstances, the criminal miscellaneous petition is dismissed. However, the learned trial Court shall make every effort to conclude the trial in the case as expeditiously as possible and preferably within six months from the next date fixed before it. The prosecution shall also ensure that its witnesses are present on the dates fixed. February 22, 2011. (S.S. Saron) Judge *hsp*