IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.Misc.No.M-16996 of 2009 Date of decision : 17.8.2009 Sohan Lal Bansal … Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and another …Respondents CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr.Vivek Goel, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Ranbir Singh Rawat, AAG, Punjab. Rakesh Kumar Jain, J. (Oral) On the last date of hearing, the case was adjourned awaiting service of respondent No.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner does not have another address of respondent No.2 and has impleaded her on the basis of the address given by her in the complaint (Annexure P-1). Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has appeared before the trial Court and he has been admitted to bail . In view the above, order dated 27.6.2009 passed by this Court is made absolute. The petitioner shall, however, keep on joining the investigation as and when called and shall abide by the provisions of Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C. Petition stands disposed of. [ Rakesh Kumar Jain ] Judge 17.8.2009 sd