CRM-M-45006-2025 1 118 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-45006-2025 Date of decision: 27.08.2025 HARKRISHAN SINGH ....Petitioner Versus STATE OF PUNJAB ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHAS MEHLA Present: Mr. Sandeep Arora, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Subhash Godara, Addl. A.G. Punjab. **** SUBHAS MEHLA, J (Oral): 1. Petitioner has filed petition under Section 528 BharatiyaNagarik Suraksha for issuing of directions for expeditious disposal of trial in case FIR No.131 dated 17.06.2021 under Sections 452, 323, 324, 427, 148 and 149 of IPC (Sections 450 and 307 of IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act, 1959 added later on) registered at Police Station Sadar, Kapurthaala (Annexure P-1). 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that FIR was registered in 2021. After investigation of the case, the challan was presented and the case is fixed for framing of charges. But despite numerous dates, accused was not produced before the learned trial Court even on issuance of production warrants and ultimately charges were framed on 22.01.2025. More than four years have been passed since registration of the case and not even a single witness has been examined till today. 3. It is well established that power under 528 of BNSS is to be exercised sparingly and only to prevent the abuse of process or to secure the MONIKA RANI 2025.09.02 13:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-45006-2025 2 ends of justice. The present petitioner has failed to show that the delay is attributable to any fault or malafide action by the prosecution or any other party. It is not the case of petitioner that he is in custody and due to delay he is suffering. The trial Court is vested with authority to manage its own docket and regulate the proceedings. The present petition does not make out any compelling ground of delay that amounts to an abuse of process of law or denial of justice. This Court is of the view that direction for the expeditious trial can not be issued in routine manner unless compelling circumstances of manifest injustice or arbitrary delay are established. Ergo this Court finds no merits in the submissions of the petitioner and present petition is dismissed. (SUBHAS MEHLA) JUDGE 27.08.2025 monika 1. Whether speaking/ reasoned : Yes /No 2. Whether reportable : Yes /No MONIKA RANI 2025.09.02 13:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document