Crl.M. No. M- 30118 of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.M. No. M- 30118 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision : 27.10.2009. ... Sanjeev Kumar ................ Petitioner vs. State of Punjab .................Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.C. Puri Present: Sh. Harsh Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioner. ... K.C. Puri, J. (Oral) Sanjeev Kumar-petitioner was tried for offence under Section 406 IPC and was ultimately convicted under Section 406 IPC by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dhuri, vide judgment dated 1.9.2006. The petitioner preferred an appeal. During the pendency of the appeal, an application for additional evidence has been moved. Learned Sessions Judge has ordered that the said application be heard alongwtih the main appeal. The controversy in the present petition is that the application for additional evidence should be decided firstly and appeal be decided later on. I have considered the abovesaid submission, but do not find Crl.M. No. M- 30118 of 2009 -2- any force in that submission. The application for additional evidence can only be appreciated during the course of hearing the appeal. So, no ground for interference is made out. Consequently, the petition stands dismissed. ( K.C. Puri ) 27.10.2009. Judge chugh