8 He would further submit that after putting the accused and their counsels on notice the witness was examined in chief on 15.02.2019 and that though this Court had directed the accused to cross examine the witness on the same day, the Trial Court was benevolent enough to grant one more day for cross examination and thereby, the case was posted for cross examination of P.W.2 on 25.02.2019. On the said date, the counsel for the petitioner has elaborately cross examined the witness and at that time, no objection has been raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner as if the petitioner was curtailed from effectively cross examining the witness and that the petitioner was thereby prejudiced or put to any difficulty. However, after the said witness had been examined in full and now taking advantage of the health condition of P.W.2 only with an intention to delay and protract, the present petition has been filed after 40 days and would submit that the very intention of the petitioner is only to delay the progress of trial . He would rely on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Vinodh Kumar V. State of Punjab reported in (2015) 3 SC 220 and would submit that the Honb'le Apex Court had held that it is imperative that if examination in chief is over the cross examination should be completed on the same day and in this case, the chief was conducted on 15.02.2019 and after giving sufficient opportunity, the case was posted to 25.02.2019, for cross examination despite the orders of this Court and thereby he would submit that there is no infirmity in the order passed by the Trial Court and would submit that sufficient opportunity has been given to the petitioner, despite the order passed by this Court, directing to cross examine the witness.
