Anita Chaudhry, J. - (1.) Challenge in this revision is to the order dated 29.04.2015 passed by Special Judge (CBI) Haryana at Panchkula.
(2.) Some facts are necessary to be exposited. Sadhvis of Dera Sacha Sauda were said to have been ravished at the Dera. Anonymous complaint sent to the High Court set the law in motion. The complaint was handed over to the CBI. The FIR was lodged in 2002, the charge -sheet was laid in July 2007. The examination of the prosecutrix started some where in 2009. There was one more victim. The cross -examination was completed after they had been called repeatedly. The defence had put a letter to the prosecutrix allegedly written by her which was denied by the victim. That letter was allegedly written in the year 2001. The letter saw the light of the day after 8 years of the complaint. The accused moved an application on 09.05.2009 seeking directions to the prosecutrix to give her specimen handwriting as she had denied her signatures on the letter mark D and Ex. DA. The trial Court vide its order dated 06.10.2009 ordered that the application would be disposed of after the prosecution had closed its evidence. That order was assailed before the High Court.
(3.) The High Court vide its order dated 08.03.2010 directed the trial Court to decide the application in accordance with law. The accused filed an application seeking disposal of the application dated 09.05.2009. The application was allowed. The prosecutrix was summoned to give her specimen signatures.;