IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-23601 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: February 15, 2011 Ravi Kumar @ Latta and another. …Petitioners Versus State of Punjab. … Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH 1. Whether reporters of local news papers may be Allowed to see judgment? 2. To be referred to reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr. Vikas Behl, Advocate, for the petitioners. Ms. Bhavna Gupta, DAG, Punjab, for the respondent-State. Alok Singh, J. (Oral) This is a petition seeking regular bail in case F.I.R. No. 205, dated 20.11.2009, under Sections 307, 323, 324, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25/54/59 of the Arms Act, registered at Police Station Phillaur, District Jalandhar. This Court on 17.01.2011 has passed the following order:- “Learned counsel for the petitioners has stated that complainant in this case Tarlochan and Gurmit Ram alleged injured have already been declared CRM M-23601 of 2010 Proclaimed Offenders in another cases pending against them, hence, they are not available to attend the Court to record their statement on oath in support of prosecution story in the present case. Learned counsel for the petitioners has further stated that petitioners are already in judicial custody for more than one year. Mr. K.D. Sachdeva, Addl. A.G., Punjab sought time to verify this fact. List on 25.01.2011.” Thereafter, on 25.01.2011, this Court has passed order, which is as under:- “ASI Prithvi Raj, Investigating Officer, is present in Court. Let him file his affidavit specifying therein as to whether Tarlochan and Gurmeet Ram alleged injured have been examined in the present case or not, if not as to whether they have been declared proclaimed offenders in other case pending against them as alleged by the petitioners and as recorded by this court in order dated 17.1.2011. List on1 15.2.2011.” Learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, on the instructions of SI Kuldeep Raj, states that it could not be verified as to why Tarlochan and Gurmeet Ram alleged injured were not examined despite several dates fixed by the learned Trial Court. This Court is constrained to observe that Police Department is not submitting reports despite specific directions issued by this Court. Twice, this Court wanted to 2 CRM M-23601 of 2010 know as to why Tarlochan and Gurmeet Ram were not being examined, but no satisfactory answer is furnished even today. SI Kuldeep Raj, present in the Court has no knowledge about the facts of this case. Mr. Bahl, learned counsel for the petitioners, has stated that in the trial, 15 dates were given for the examination of the prosecution witnesses. Petitioners are said to be in jail for more than one year. Without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I direct that petitioners be released on bail to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. However, it is clarified that this bail is being granted only on account of failure of the police to submit the explanation as sought by this Court twice. Keeping the petitioners in jail for the fault of the police would amount to violation of personal liberty. Let, Copy of this order be sent by the Registry of this Court to the Director General of Police, Punjab, as well as, the Home Secretary, Punjab, to take appropriate necessary action in the matter in hand. February 15, 2010 ( Alok Singh ) vkd Judge 3