IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.Rev.No.2167 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision : 19.9.2011 Amandeep Singh @ Amna ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER .... Present: Mr.Balbir Singh Sewak, Advocate for the petitioner. ..... MAHESH GROVER, J. This is a petition directed against the order dated 20.8.2011. It has been stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that one opportunity to cross-examine the complainant is warranted and the learned trial Court wrongly recorded the fact that opportunity to cross-examine had been given but not availed of. It is projected before this Court that the counsel representing the accused was busy in some other case and thus could not be present. On due consideration of the matter, I am of the opinion that the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner regarding the counsel representing the petitioner being busy in some other case is not fortified by any other material on record. Given this situation the Court has to accept the order of the learned trial Court as it exists which reflects that despite the opportunity given the counsel Crl.Rev.No.2167 of 2011 (O&M) -2- for the accused did not avail of the same. There ought to have been some material from where the Court could have inferred that the order of the learned trial Court was unjust. The previous zimni orders have not been shown to this Court, as a result of which it cannot be concluded as to whether the impugned order is unwarranted. No ground to interfere. Dismissed. 19.9.2011 (MAHESH GROVER) JUDGE dss