KEWAL KRISHAN Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD counsel. It is not disputed that while disposing of an application for bail filed by the petitioner herein, this Court directed on 15.5.1995 that the bail application shall stand dismissed, but, at the same time directing that the trial of the case should by completed within three months. It is also not disputed by the learned AAG, that the trial Court has not disposed of the case within the said period, nor, had sought for extension of time for completion of the trial. Today, it is reported by the Ld. AAG, that the evidence of the prosecution has since been completed. Even there the date on which the evidence of the prosecution was completed has not been given. Vide order dated 13.10.1995 the Explanation of the concerned Sessions Judge was called for as to why the case has not been completed and reported back to this Court. In response to this order the learned Sessions Judge, has reported that there is no order on his file directing the disposal of the case within three months. But, the petitioner has specifically stated in paragraph 13 of this petition that the certified copy of this order was given to the court on 28.5.1995. Specific attention of the concerned Sessions Judge be drawn to this fact and he be asked to explain as to how and why the certified copy stated to have been given to his court has been missed. These things being apart, I feel that in spite of the specific direction given by the Court, the trial has not been completed by the trial Court and the prosecution has not co-operated and, therefore, the petitioner is entitled to the bail as prayed for. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing sufficient surety to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurdaspur.