IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-31515 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: October 20, 2011 Yashpal Bhatia …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. Kuldip S. Chaudhary, Advocate, for the petitioner. Alok Singh, J. (Oral) First bail application was rejected vide order dated 05.01.2011 and second bail application was also rejected on 22.03.2011, vide order dated 22.03.2011; Trial Court was requested to expedite the trial and not to grant any unnecessary adjournments. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that even after passing of order dated 22.03.2011, no progress has taken place in the trial and remaining prosecution witnesses, who are government servant, have not CRM M-31515 of 2011 been examined so far. This is a serious matter. However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and quantity of the smack recovered from the petitioner, I am not inclined to allow this bail application in the absence of any subsequent changed circumstances justifying the filing of the present third bail application in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in the matter of State of Maharashtra vs. Captain Buddhikota Subha Rao reported in 1989 Supp. (2) Supreme Court Cases, 605. Present petition is dismissed. However, learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and to conclude the same within 10 months from the date certified copy of this order is placed before the Trial Court. If trial is not concluded, for no fault of the petitioner, he shall be at liberty to move fresh bail application before this Court. October 20, 2011 ( Alok Singh ) vkd Judge 2