CRM No. M-7684 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM No. M-7684 of 2009 Decided on:- 03.08.2011 Baljinder Singh ......Petitioner Versus State of Punjab .......Respondent Coram HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER Present: Ms. Rupinder Basanti, Advocate for Mr. Sunil Agnihotri, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, DAG, Punjab. **** MAHESH GROVER, J(Oral) This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying for quashing of FIR No.101 dated 29.5.2002 under the provisions of Sections 326, 323, 452, 148, 149 IPC registered at Police Station Tanda, Tehsil Dasuya, District Hoshiarpur. The facts of the case are that the petitioner was challaned for the aforesaid offence. He, however, absconded and was declared a proclaimed offender. The other co-accused of the petitioner faced trial. They were awarded an acquittal on the ground that the crucial witness had turned hostile and in the absence of any credible evidence, the court dismissed the prosecution version. The present petition has been filed by taking a plea that since the other co-accused have been acquitted, no fruitful purpose would be served by ordering the petitioner to stand trial. This matter has been pending since 2009. On 19.3.2009, notice of motion was issued and thereafter more than two years have elapsed without there being any serious attempt being made by learned counsel for the petitioner to make his submissions. Today when the case was taken up, Ms.Rupinder Basanti,Advocate appeared for Mr. Sunil Agnihotri,Advocate and made a prayer for adjournment, which was declined. She then addressed the arguments. On due consideration of the matter, I am of the opinion that the CRM No. M-7684 of 2009 2 instant petition deserves to be dismissed. The petitioner who is a proclaimed offender and fugitive from law cannot be granted any concession. The petitioner has not faced the trial and therefore, it is not possible for this Court to comment on the credence qua the co-accused of the petitioner in the exercise of the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. It is possible there may be some evidence which would be sufficient to warrant his conviction. In the absence of any mechanism to comment upon the same in the exercise of the power under Section 482 Cr. P.C and also noticing the fact that the petitioner is a proclaimed offender,I do not intend to interfere and quash the FIR. However, in case the petitioner presents himself before the learned trial Court and submit himself to its jurisdiction and also makes a prayer for his being enlarged on bail, the learned trial Court shall consider the same and decide it in accordance with law within a period of one week. The petitioner would also be required to face trial but noticing the fact that the case pertains to the year 2002, the trial Court shall make an endeavor to conclude it as expeditiously as possible. 03.08.2011 ( MAHESH GROVER) mamta JUDGE