VIDYA DEVI Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AFTER hearing the learned counsel for the parties, no ground is made out to grant bail to the petitioner. The application is dismissed.

(2.) CONCEDEDLY , charge in this case was framed on November 8,1995 and the case was adjourned to February 13,1996 for prosecution evidence. It appears that on that date, no prosecution witness was present and that no evidence was recorded. The case was adjourned to February 14,1996 for prosecution evidence. Even on that date no prosecution witness was present. Consequently, the case was further, adjourned to May 9,1996 for prosecution evidence. Even on that date, no prosecution witness was present. Now, the case stands adjourned to August 28,1996 for prosecution evidence, particularly for examination of formal witnesses, such as, police officials and to produce the report of the Chemical Examiner and some other documents.

(3.) IN this case, Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Assistant Sub -Inspector, Police Station Sadar, Gurgaon is present in court. However, Mr. Parkash Chand Assistant Sub -Inspector, is stated to be the Investigating Officer in this case. He (Mr. Parkash Chand, ASI) is directed through Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Assistant Sub -Inspector, to produce all the formal witnesses on the date fixed. Other prosecution witnesses shall be produced on the next date of hearing which shall not be beyond fifteen days., failing which Parkash Chand, Assistant Sub -Inspector would personally be responsible for non -production of the witnesses and in the event of his failure to do so, Senior Superintendent of Police, Gurgaon is directed to take appropriate action in the matter.