IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. R. No.935 of 2010 Date of Decision:21.2.2011 Raj Rani .... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others .... Respondents CORAM: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur Present: None for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Rana, D.A.G. Haryana. Mr. Rahul Rathore, Advocate for respondents No.2,5,6,7 & 8. Mr. R.S. Mamli, Advocate for respondents No.3 and 4. **** 1.Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers 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? NIRMALJIT KAUR, J.(Oral) This revision petition is directed against the order dated 18.2.2010 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal, vide which the application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. was dismissed. No one was present on 6.9.2010 on behalf of the petitioner and the matter was adjourned to 12.11.2010. On 12.11.2010 also no one appeared on behalf of the petitioner and the matter was adjourned for today i.e. 21.2.2011. Even today, no one is present on behalf of the petitioner. Moreover, learned counsel for the respondents has placed on record the certified copy of the order dated 18.5.2010 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal. As per this order, the second application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. was moved. The said application was moved after 4 more witnesses were examined. The said application also stands dismissed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal, vide order dated 18.5.2010. The said order has not been challenged. The present revision petition is accordingly dismissed in view of the above developments. 21.2.2011 ( NIRMALJIT KAUR ) rajeev JUDGE