IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Criminal Miscellaneous No. M-29917 of 2008 Date of Decision: November 19, 2008 Kulwinder Kaur .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. M.K. Dogra, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. K.S. Sidhu, D.A.G. (Punjab). . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) This petition has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.186 dated 23.8.2005 lodged for offences under Section(s) 306, 201, 148, 149 IPC with Police Station, Chheharta, District Amritsar. It has been contended that the petitioner is being tried by the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Faridkot, as at the point in time when the occurrence took place, the petitioner was a juvenile. The petitioner had been appearing regularly after framing of charge from 28.7.2006 till 28.3.2008. The counsel for the petitioner noted the adjourned date wrongly as Crl. Misc. No. M-29917 of 2008 [2] 22.6.2008 whereas infact it was 22.5.2008. It was only under bonafide belief that the petitioner did not put in appearance on 22.5.2008. In view of the non appearance, bail has been cancelled. Learned counsel has further stated that no purpose would be served by taking the petitioner in custody in view of the reason that all other accused being tried by the Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar, have been acquitted vide judgment dated 11.5.2006. Notice of motion. Mr. Kamaldeep Singh Sidhu, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, accept notice on the asking of the Court. Complete copy of the petition has been handed over to him in Court. I have considered the issue involved. The petitioner being juvenile is being tried by the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Faridkot. The co-accused of the petitioner have already been acquitted vide judgment dated 11.5.2006. Record shows that the petitioner had been appearing since the time of framing of charge till 28.3.2008. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner to the effect that the Advocate had noted a wrong date does not seem to be without merit. I have also considered the fact that this Court while dealing with Criminal Miscellaneous No.M-5265 of 2008 has directed the Juvenile Justice Board to expedite the case and conclude the trial Crl. Misc. No. M-29917 of 2008 [3] within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order passed on 28.2.2008. Considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, the petition is allowed. The petitioner would put in appearance within two weeks from today. The petitioner would not be taken in custody and shall be released on furnishing bail bonds. (AJAI LAMBA) November 19, 2008 JUDGE avin