IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-987 of 2008 Date of decision: 28th October, 2010 Jaswinder Kumar … Petitioner Versus Railway Police Force Post, Mukerian and others … Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. Rajesh K. Dadwal, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Jaspal Kaur Gurna, Advocate for the respondents. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) Present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying that the Crime Case No.219 dated 5.6.2006 registered at Railway Police Force Chownkey, Mukerian, District Hoshiarpur under Sections 154 and 179 of the Railway Act, 1989 be quashed. This Court, on October 13, 2010 passed the following order: “Counsel for the State, on instructions from SI Thandi Ram, has stated that ten witnesses have been cited and out of them six have been examined and the case is now fixed for 21st October, 2010 for recording evidence of three witnesses. Counsel for the State has stated that the trial was continuing, as further proceedings were only stayed on September 23, 2010. Counsel for the petitioner is not available. In the interest of justice, adjourned to 27th October, 2010.” Criminal Misc. No. M-987 of 2008 Since, six witnesses out of the total ten have been examined, this Court cannot come to the rescue of the petitioner, as this Court has always held a view that once the trial has proceeded, the same has to culminate into acquittal or conviction. Therefore, the present petition is hereby disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to raise all arguments available to him under law, before the trial Court at an appropriate stage. Considering the fact that the Crime Case was registered in the month of June, 2006 and a period of more than four years has elapsed, personal appearance of the petitioner before the trial Court is exempted, subject to his filing an undertaking that he shall cause his appearance as and when required by the trial Court. He shall also undertake that the evidence, if any, recorded in his absence but in the presence of his counsel, shall be binding upon him. The trial Court may incorporate any other condition in the undertaking to be furnished by the accused. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE October 28, 2010 rps 2