IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. Petition No. M-31163 of 2011 Date of Decision: October 17, 2011 Manoj …Petitioner Versus State of Haryana … Respondents 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. R.P.S. Yadav, Advocate, for the petitioner. Alok Singh, J. (Oral) This is a second bail application before this Court. First bail application being Crl. Misc. No. 371 of 2011 was dismissed as withdrawn on 06.01.2011. Before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, first bail application was rejected on merit. Thereafter, second bail application No. 278 of 2011 was moved after withdrawal of first bail application from this Court, which was dismissed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge vide order dated 13.07.2011 on the ground that there is no subsequent CRM M-31163 of 2011 changed circumstance to entertain the second bail application. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that out of 31 prosecution witnesses, only 7 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far and petitioner is in judicial custody since last about 22 months, therefore, he is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Section 436-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure as incorporated by 2006 Amendment reads as under:- “436-A. Maximum period for which an undertrial prisoner can be detained. – Where a person has, during the period of investigation, inquiry or trial under this Code of an offence under any law (not being an offence for which the punishment of death has been specified as one of the punishments under that law) undergone detention for a period extending up to one-half of the maximum period of imprisonment specified for that offence under that law, he shall be released by the Court on his personal bond with or without sureties. Provided that the Court may, after hearing the Public Prosecutor and for reasons to be recorded by it in writing, order the continued detention of such person for a period longer than one-half of the said period or release him on bail instead of the personal bond with or without sureties: Provided further that no such person shall in any case be detained during the period of investigation, inquiry or trial for more than the 2 CRM M-31163 of 2011 maximum period of imprisonment provided for the said offence under that law.” An accused can be considered to be enlarged on bail if he has already undergone half of the sentence and trial is not likely to be concluded in near future. Since in the present case, petitioner is facing criminal trial for the offences punishable under Sections 364-A, 302, 201, 120- B/34 IPC and offence under Section 302 IPC is punishable with life imprisonment or death, therefore, no benefit under Section 436-A of the Code can be granted to the petitioner on the ground he is in judicial custody for last 22 months. Second bail application or subsequent bail application can only be entertained when there is any subsequent changed circumstance in favour of the accused. No material subsequent changed circumstance has been placed before me except that only seven prosecution witnesses have been examined out of 31 witnesses so far. I do not find any merit in this petition, therefore, I am not inclined to entertain this petition. Dismissed. However, Trial Court is requested to expedite the trial. October 17, 2011 ( Alok Singh ) vkd Judge 3