CR No.261 of 2011 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.261 of 2011 (O&M). Decided on: February 08, 2011. Rameshwar. .. Appellant VERSUS Ram Niwas and others. .. Respondents * * * CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.S.BEDI 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. Whether to be referred to the Reporter? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? * * * PRESENT Mr.Ashok Bhardwaj, Advocate, for the appellant. M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) The petitioner is defendant before the trial Court. He claims that without giving fair opportunity to the defendant- petitioner to produce himself as DW, the evidence has been closed vide impugned order dated 16.08.2010. It is stated by the counsel for the petitioner that on . . . 1 CR No.261 of 2011 (O&M) account of security reasons and threat to the life of the defendant- petitioner, he was unable to appear on 16.08.2010, when the evidence of the defendant was closed. Counsel for the petitioner has not been able to name any other witness who is required to be examined. After hearing the counsel for the petitioner and going through the various documents pointed out by the counsel, it is apparent that the defendant had approached High Court for security. Appreciating threat perceptions, it appears that the security has been provided to the petitioner. Counsel for the petitioner has not been able to explain any other reason for the non-examination of the defendant- petitioner as a witness. However, on asking of the Court, counsel for the defendant-petitioner submits that if one opportunity is afforded, the defendant-petitioner will appear before the trial Court as his own witness. Next date of hearing before the trial Court is stated to be 10.03.2011. A perusal of the impugned order dated 16.08.2010, indicates that the case is fixed for rebuttal evidence and arguments. Without expression of any opinion on merits and without considering the purpose for which the defendant wants to appear as a witness, this petition is allowed in limine and impugned order dated 16.08.2010 is hereby set aside, in the interest of justice, without issuing any notice to the plaintiffs-respondents to prevent . . . 2 CR No.261 of 2011 (O&M) any delay and unnecessary expenditure by issuing a direction that the petitioner will appear before the trial Court on 10.03.2011, at his own risk and responsibility without putting forth any excuse in the name of security, after making adequate necessary arrangement for his protection at his own level on 10.03.2011. The petitioner will offer a sum of ` 5,000/- to be paid to the plaintiffs-respondents on 10.03.2011 as costs. One opportunity will be granted by the trial Court on 10.03.2011 or any other day suitable to the trial Court. It is also ordered that in case after receipt of costs, the counsel for the plaintiffs-respondents, for any reason, avoids to cross-examine the petitioner, the cross-examination will be deemed to be nil. It will be open to the trial Court to order that despite opportunity, the plaintiffs- respondents have failed to cross-examine the petitioner. It is made clear that in case the defendant-petitioner does not appear on 10.03.2011, and does not offer the costs of ` 5,000/-, this petition will be deemed to have been dismissed. (M.M.S.BEDI) JUDGE February 08, 2011. rka . . . 3