BACHITTAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under Section 401 Cr.P.C. for quashing the order of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Malout dated 29.3.2001 vide which the evidence of the prosecution has been closed.

(2.) SHRI Baltej Singh Sidhu, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order passed by the learned Magistrate is palpably erroneous. He submitted that the learned Magistrate has closed the evidence by order despite the fact that the witnesses were served. He submitted that once the service was effected upon the witnesses then the learned trial Court should have adopted coercive method for securing the presence of the witnesses but he has no right to close the evidence. He further submitted that the petitioner has not to gain by delaying the trial.

(3.) I have given my thoughtful consideration to the rival contentions made by the learned Counsel for the parties. The impugned order reads as under :-