IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. M. No. M-7052 of 2010 Date of decision: 01.09.2011 Lalit Kumar ..Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and Anr. ..Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr. Sandeep Arora, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. G.S. Brar, AAG, Punjab. Mr. J.S. Chahal, Advocate for respondent No. 2. **** SABINA, J. Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short 'Cr.PC') seeking quashing of the impugned order dated 19.1.2010 (Annexure P-1) passed by the trial Court whereby the evidence of the prosecution was closed. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that the instant petition deserves to be allowed. Impugned order dated 19.1.2010 reads as under:- “No PW is present, nor served for today. Perusal of file revealed that today is the fourth last opportunity for prosecution to complete the evidence. The summons were sent through the office of Sessions Judge, Jalandhar to SSP Jalandhar for execution on the witnesses, but the summons have received back unserved. So, I do not find any justification for grant of Crl. M. No. M-7052 of 2010 -2- further adjournment for prosecution evidence. Accordingly, the prosecution evidence is closed by the order of the court. Now to come up on 8.2.2010 for the statement of accused under Section 313 Cr.PC”. A perusal of the above order reveals that the witnesses could not be examined by the prosecution as the summons has been received back unserved. Petitioner-complainant has already appeared as a witness in the trial Court. Now only the official witness remain to be examined. The prosecution has to only examine Constable Joga Singh and Constable Amarjit Singh as witnesses.. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that only two opportunities be allowed to the prosecution to conclude its evidence. Learned State counsel has assured that the above witnesses will be summoned for their examination. Accordingly, this petition is allowed. Impugned order dated 19.1.2010 is set aside. Trial Court is directed to afford two opportunities to the prosecution to conclude its evidence. Thereafter, the trial Court shall proceed further with the trial in accordance with law. (SABINA) September 01, 2011 JUDGE Poonam (II)