Crl. Misc. No. M-28319 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-28319 of 2010 Date of Decision: 23.02.2011 Balwinder Singh .... Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present : Mr. Sameer Sachdeva, Advocate for the petitioner 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? ALOK SINGH, J. (ORAL) This is an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail in a case FIR No. 257 dated 20.8.2008 under Sections 15, 61, 85 of NDPS Act registered at Police Station Basti Jodhewal, Ludhiana. On 2.2.2011, this Court has passed following order:- “This Court on 9.12.2010 and 14.1.2011 has passed following orders: - Order dated 9.12.2010 Vide order dated 24.2.2010 passed by this Court in the earlier petition filed by the petitioner for grant of bail, this Court directed the trial court to expedite the trial and conclude the same within a period of six months. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that in Crl. Misc. No. M-28319 of 2010 2 spite of the directions issued by this Court to conclude the trial within a period of six months, after passing of more than nine and a half months, not even a single witness has been examined. To support his contention, zimni orders have been reproduced in the petition, which clearly show that the delay was on the part of the prosecution and the petitioner is in custody because of the fault of the prosecution. It is clear from the zimni orders that on various dates, the accused was not produced before the trial Court. The trial Court has not made any efforts to conclude the trial within the stipulated period. Trial Court is directed to submit a report in this regard within a period of two weeks. Adjourned to 14.1.2011. Order dated 14.1.2011 It transpires that learned trial Court has not submitted a report despite of directions given by this Court vide order dated 9.12.2009. Learned trial Court is directed to submit a report on or before the next date of hearing. List on 2.2.2011. Registry is directed to fax this order to learned trial court immediately. Report submitted by Shri Karamjit Singh, Judge, Special Court, Ludhiana reveals that order dated Crl. Misc. No. M-28319 of 2010 3 24.2.2010 and 9.12.2010 passed by this Court are not available on the file of the trial Court. It has been submitted that in the absence of orders dated 24.2.2010 and 9.12.2010, trial could not be concluded. Order dated 24.2.2010 contemplates clear mandate to the trial Court to conclude the trial within a period of six months. Registry to report as to whether order passed by this Court dated 24.2.2010 and 9.12.2010 were communicated to the trial Court or not. Since the trial Court has reported that trial is listed for 8.2.2011, therefore, list this matter on 23.2.2011. Meanwhile, the trial Court as well as the Registry of this Court shall submit the report as stated herein above and status of the case. Copy of this order be sent to trial Court.” Registry as well learned trial Court have submitted their respective reports. As per the report of the trial Court order dated 24.2.2010 as well as order dated 9.12.2010 were never received by the trial Court. While as per the report of the Registry both the orders were forwarded to the trial Court. Reports are contradictory. Responsibility has to be fixed who is guilty for non-compliance of Court's order. Let Registrar Vigilance Punjab enquire into the matter and submit his report on the administrative side within three weeks. I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on regular bail Crl. Misc. No. M-28319 of 2010 4 at this stage. Trial Court is directed to make every effort to expedite the trial. Petition stands disposed of. If trial is not concluded within three months, petitioner shall be at liberty to move fresh bail application. (ALOK SINGH) 23.02.2011 JUDGE reena