MANOJ KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An application for an adjournment has been moved by learned counsel for the petitioner. In view of the reasons mentioned in the application, no ground for grant of adjournment is made out. The present petition has arisen out of an application received from the jail wherein, Manoj Kumar (petitioner) has prayed for cancellation of FIR No.155, dated 28.06.2011, for the offence punishable under Section 25 of the Arms Act, registered at Police Station, Patran District Patiala.

(2.) No one has appeared on behalf of the petitioner. I have heard learned counsel for State of Punjab as well as learned counsel for State of Haryana and with their able assistance gone through the material available on record. After hearing learned counsel for both the States, this Court finds that an application was sent by Manoj Kumar (petitioner) through jail which has been ordered to be treated on judicial side. Learned counsel for the State of Punjab submits that the petitioner is facing the charge for the offence punishable under Section 25 of the Arms Act in the present case. The prosecution has already led its entire evidence and the case is fixed for defence evidence and arguments. It has also been brought to notice of this Court that the petitioner is also facing more criminal cases in Punjab as well as in Haryana including a case under Section 302, IPC.

(3.) In view of the advanced stage of trial for which the petitioner wants the cancellation of the FIR, no ground for cancellation of FIR No.155, dated 28.06.2011, for the offence punishable under Section 25 of the Arms Act, registered at Police Station, Patran District Patiala, is made out. Dismissed.