IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Revision No.49 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: January 10, 2011 Nihal Singh. …Petitioner 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. Sukhdeep Singh Sidhu, Advocate, for the petitioner. Alok Singh, J. (Oral) Accused-revisionist has invoked revisional jurisdiction of this Court, assailing the order dated 05.01.2011 passed by learned Judge Special Court, Sir Muktsar Sahib, under the N.D.P.S. Act, thereby rejecting the application moved by the accused-revisionist under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying to recall all the prosecution witnesses for further cross examination. Record reveals that earlier Sh. Babu Singh Sidhu, Advocate, had appeared on behalf of the accused-revisionist and he had cross-examined all the witnesses produced from CRR No.49 of 2011 the prosecution side. Thereafter, statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded. Accused has also produced one witness in defence and thereafter, has moved present application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. on the ground that now he has engaged Sh. Gurjit Singh Khadial, Advocate. It has been further stated in the application that Sh. Gurjit Singh Khadial, Advocate has found that all the prosecution witnesses were not thoroughly cross-examined by the earlier counsel Sh. Babu Singh Sidhu, hence, he may be permitted to cross-examine all the prosecution witnesses on the points which were left by the earlier counsel. Having heard learned counsel for the accused- revisionist and having perused the record, I am of the opinion that earlier counsel has cross-examined all the witnesses; thereafter statement of the accused was also recorded under Section 313 of the Code; thereafter accused has produced one defence witness now, it is not open to the accused – revisionist to recall all the prosecution witnesses on the ground that new counsel has been engaged. In the opinion of this Court, no interference is called for. Dismissed. January 10, 2011 ( Alok Singh ) vkd Judge 2