IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Criminal Misc. No.15892 -M of 2009 DATE OF DECISION : FEBRUARY 26, 2010 AMARJIT SINGH ....... PETITIONER(S) VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB .... RESPONDENT(S) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: Mr. Sandeep Wadhawan, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Ms. Rajni Gupta, Addl.AG, Punjab. AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has put in appearance in deference to order dated 20.7.2009. Presence of the petitioner was required to be secured, which has been done. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further assured the court, on behalf of the petitioner, that the petitioner shall continue to appear before the court and shall not cause delay in the proceedings. In view of the facts noticed in order dated 20.7.2009, coupled with the fact that the petitioner has already put in appearance, the petition is allowed. The trial Court shall be free to impose any condition, which it deems fit in the circumstances of the case, including imposition of heavy Criminal Misc. No.15892 -M of 2009 2 surety in order to obviate default by the petitioner in future. The petitioner would be required to furnish fresh surety. February 26, 2010 ( AJAI LAMBA ) Kang JUDGE 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?