IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM M-13114 of 2010 Date of Decision:16.8.2010 Rajbir Singh .... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana .... Respondent CORAM: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur Present: Mr. Vivek Khatri, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Priyanka Dalal, A.A.G. Haryana. **** 1.Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? NIRMALJIT KAUR, J.(Oral) The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 19.4.2010 (Annexure P-2) passed by learned Special Judge, Hisar, under P.C. Act whereby application of the petitioner under Section 73 of the Evidence Act read with Section 311 Cr.P.C. for recalling PW-6, for taking his specimen signatures was rejected. The only reason given in dismissing the application was that the case is one of the oldest 25 cases pending in this Court and the petitioner had earlier failed to avail the opportunity to take specimen signatures of the concerned DSP. Be that as it may, the truth is necessary to be ascertained and the same can not be sacrificed on the ground that the case is one of the oldest 25 cases pending in the Court. The complaint is of the year 2006 and the petitioner is not responsible for the delay as he examined as many as six witnesses on one date. CRM M-13114 of 2010 -2- Accordingly, impugned order dated 19.4.2010 (Annexure P-2) passed by learned Special Judge, Hisar, is set aside and one last opportunity is granted to the petitioner to recall PW-6 for taking his specimen signatures subject to his paying Rs.5000/- as costs. The petitioner shall complete the limited evidence of PW-6 in terms of the prayer made by him in one effective opportunity to be granted by the trial Court. Disposed of accordingly. 16.8.2010 ( NIRMALJIT KAUR ) rajeev JUDGE