Crl. Misc. No.M-19769 of 2010 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc. No. M-19769 of 2010 Date of Decision: September 8, 2010 Gurvinder Singh …..Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab …..Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI. -.- Present:- Mr.Munish Kapila, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Abhishekh Chautala, AAG, Punjab. Mr.H.S. Brar, Advocate for the complainant. -.- M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) Petitioner seeks the concession of bail in a case registered at the instance of Gurmail Singh, his father-in-law, alleging that the petitioner had maltreated his wife Sumandeep Kaur on account of demand of dowry as a result of which she died on May 6, 2009 by consuming poison. Crl. Misc. No.M-19769 of 2010 [2] In view of presumption under Section 113-A of the Evidence Act, it will not be appropriate to arrive at a conclusion at this stage that the petitioner has got a plausible strong defence in his favour. Counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to various orders passed by the trial Court w.e.f. 9.3.2010 when the charges were framed to show that on account of non-appearance of prosecution witnesses on April 5, 2010, April 26, 2010, June 3, 2010, July 3, 2010, July 23, 2010, August 10, 2010 and September 3, 2010, the trial is being adjourned for want of prosecution witnesses. It is apparent that on account of delay in adjudication of the matter, the right of liberty of the petitioner is being prejudiced. The petition for grant of bail is dismissed. However, a direction is issued to the trial Court to examine the material witnesses by November 1, 2010. In case, for any reason, adjournment is sought by the prosecution agency, the provisions of Section 309 Cr.P.C. may be adhered to. It is further directed that the trial be concluded within six months after November 1, 2010 by giving fair opportunity to the petitioner to produce his defence. September 8, 2010 (M.M.S.BEDI) sanjay JUDGE