IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc.-M No.34277 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: November 14, 2011 BalkarSingh ...Petitioner Versus Rajnish Dhawan ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH 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? Present: Mr.Bikramjit Arora, Advocate, for the petitioner. ***** RANJIT SINGH, J. The application moved by the petitioner under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for leading additional evidence was resisted and the preliminary objection was taken that the same is not legally maintainable. The Court, after hearing the parties, found that the petitioner took numerous opportunities for leading defence evidence from 12.4.2007 till 26.2.2010, when the evidence was closed on a statement made by the petitioner. Even then, the petitioner has filed a revision. The courts have rightly found that this is only a delaying tactics on the part of the petitioner. In my view, the prayer of the petitioner for leading additional evidence has been rightly declined. No case for interference under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is made out. Dismissed. November 14, 2011 ( RANJIT SINGH ) ramesh JUDGE