IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-6426 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: April 18, 2011 Jasbir Singh ….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. K.S. Sidhu, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. K.D. Sachdeva, Addl. A.G., Punjab, for the respondent-State. Mr. Tejinder Pal Singh, Advocate, for the complainant. **** Alok Singh, J. (Oral) This is a petition seeking regular bail in case FIR No. 101, dated 21.07.2010, under Sections 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 25/27/30 of the Arms Act, registered at Police Station Sadar Sunam. Crl. Misc. No.M-6426 of 2011 Learned counsel for the petitioner states that as per the medical opinion (Annexure P/2), injuries have been classified as simple. He has further stated that petitioner is in judicial custody w.e.f. 18.09.2010. Learned counsel for the petitioner, while placing reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the matter of State of Kerala vs. Raneef reported in 2011 (1) R.C.R. (Criminal) 381, has argued that if there is inordinate delay in the trial, accused- petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail, keeping in mind that period spent in the jail during the pendency of the trial cannot be restored to the accused-petitioner, if accused- petitioner is ultimately acquitted by the Trial Court. Mr. Tejinder Pal Singh, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the complainant, has vehemently argued that though as per M.L.R., the injuries were found to be simple in nature, yet injuries were caused with intention to kill, therefore, offence under Section 307 IPC is clearly made out. Mr. K.D. Sachdeva, learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab, supports the argument of learned counsel for the complainant. Undisputedly, till date only one prosecution witness has been examined and his cross-examination is still going on. Petitioner/accused is in judicial custody w.e.f. 18.09.2010. It seems that trial is not likely to be concluded at the earliest. 2 Crl. Misc. No.M-6426 of 2011 Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, present petition is allowed. Let, petitioner be released on bail to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. April 18, 2011 ( Alok Singh ) vkd Judge 3