IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Revision No. 933 of 2007. Date of Decision: August 28,2007. Gurjant Singh ....Petitioner through Mr. Kuldeep Tiwari, Advocate Versus State of Punjab . ...Respondent through Mr. Sandeep Moudgil, DAG, Punjab. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers 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? SURYA KANT,J.(ORAL) This revision petition is directed against the order dated 9th May, 2007 whereby the petitioner's prayer to release his motor cycle on Sapurdari, has been declined. Notice of motion was issued and in response thereto, Mr. Moudgil, learned DAG, Punjab, has put in appearance. He has pointed out that the investigation is still going on and challan has not been presented so far. On the other hand, learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon a judgment of this Court in the case of Rajesh Kumar v State of Haryana, 2007(2) RCR (Crl.), 561. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to move a fresh application in the light of the observations made by this Court in the judgment, referred to above, after presentation of challan. Disposed of. August 28, 2007. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE