IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Criminal Miscellaneous No. M-10418 of 2010 Date of Decision: April 07, 2010 Jagdish .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Haryana & Others .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. A.K. Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) This petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. prays for quashing Order dated 10.6.2009 (Annexure P-2) passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Narwana and Order dated 26.2.2010 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Sessions Judge, Jind while exercising revisional jurisdiction. The sequence of events that can be culled out from the orders placed on record is that FIR was lodged on 11.1.2003. Charge was framed on 18.7.2003. A number of opportunities were given to the prosecution to lead evidence. Four last opportunities were also given whereafter prosecution evidence was closed by order of the Court on 18.11.2008. The said order was not challenged by the prosecution. Crl. Misc. No. M-10418 of 2010 [2] Statement of accused was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. on 21.11.2008 and the case was adjourned for defence evidence and arguments. It seems that on 29.1.2009, an application was filed under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for examining Dr. R.K. Sharma as prosecution witness. The application has been dismissed while recording the sequence of events as noticed above. The petitioner carried a revision which has also been dismissed. The revisional Court has recorded that it was to the knowledge of the complainant and prosecution that Dr. R.K. Sharma is required to be examined as his name figures in the list of witnesses. The said witness however was not examined. Considering the above facts, I find no reason to interfere while exercising inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The petition is dismissed. (AJAI LAMBA) April 07, 2010 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?