IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No. 2498 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 20.12.2011 Shri Gulshan Singh ...Petitioner Versus M/s Panipat Hire Purchase and Leasing Pvt. Limited ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH Present: Mr. Arun Chandra, Advocate for the petitioner. None for the respondent. ***** RANJIT SINGH J. This order shall dispose of Criminal Revision Nos. 2498, 2499 and 2500 of 2009 These revisions are directed against the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class on 01.06.2009. The trial Court had closed the evidence of defence on the ground that no DW was present. It was found that the petitioner-accused had taken sufficient opportunity including the last opportunity to lead the evidence. Still, no DW was present when the impugned order was passed. The order closing the evidence was passed on 01.06.2009. Most likely the trial, by now, would be over. If the petitioner has suffered any prejudice on account of the order closing his defence, he would be at liberty to plead the same before the appellate Court. In addition, the petitioner would have sufficient means to move an application before the appellate Court to lead additional evidence as is permissible Criminal Revision No. 2498 of 2009 -2- under Section 391 Cr.P.C. At this stage, no interference in the revisions is made out. Dismissed. In view of the above, there is no need to pass the order on application seeking condonation of delay. December 20, 2011 ( RANJIT SINGH ) rts JUDGE