The Magistrate can take cognizance of an offence on the basis of a private complaint even after accepting a cancellation report filed by the police.

JUDGMENT

R.L. Anand, J. - Om Parkash s/o Shri Sohan Lal r/o Mandi Adampur, Tehsil Adampur, District Hisar, has filed the present criminal revision and it has been directed against the order dated 27.10.1997 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Hisar, who accepted the revision of Surender Singh s/o Chaudhary Bansi Lal and Joginder Singh alias Jog, former Haryana Minister, and dismissed the private complaint filed by the petitioner by holding that after the acceptance of the negative report filed by the police under Section 173, Criminal Procedure Code, the learned Magistrate could not take cognizance into the matter.

2. Earlier, the learned Magistrate vide order dated 25.2.1997 decided to summon the respondents under Section 307/34, Indian Penal Code, read with section 25 of the Arms Act in a complaint filed by the petitioner under Section 307/34, Indian Penal Code read with section 25 of the Arms Act.

3. The brief facts of the case can be described as follows :-

The petitioner filed a complaint with brief allegations that he was a resident of Adampur and on 27.4.1996 when he was returning to his home at about 10.30 AM after casting his vote in the elections of the State Assembly in the school and when he reached towards village at a distance of 1-1/2 or 2 killas from the school, then the candidate Surender Singh of Haryana Vikas Party and Joginder Singh alias Jog and Mr. Yadav, Gunman, in white clothes, along with 6/7 other persons came running from the side of the polling booths in the school and at that time his nephew Sushil Kumar s/o Pirthi Singh was letting the ladies descend from a trolley and Jaswant Singh was also standing there at some distance; then Surender Singh and Joginder Singh alias Jog, want towards the vehicle Tata Sumo. Surender Singh after taking the pistol from his gunman Mr. Yadav, fired two shots towards the complainant-party. Joginder Singh alias Jog asked his companion Surender Singh to fire straight on which Surender Singh fired third shot from the pistol which hit in the left thigh of his nephew Surender Singh, who fell down. On seeing this, the accused while sitting in their vehicle ran away towards Mandi Adampur side with their respective weapons. The injured was admitted in the hospital at Mandi Adampur, who, after first aid, was referred to Hisar. Jaswant Singh accompanied the injured to the hospital. The complainant first went to his house to inform his brothers and when he was going to report about the occurrence to the police, then, the police met him at Kranti Chowk and he got recorded his statement to Ronki Ram, SHO, Police Station, Adampur, on which FIR No. 31 of 1996 was recorded. After investigation of the case, the prosecution recommended for the cancellation of the F.I.R. which was accepted by the court. Hence the complaint.

4. The complaint, in order to prove his version appeared as his own witness as PW-1 and he also examined Sushil Kumar, injured as PW-2, Jaswant Singh, PW-3, besides Dr. J.S. Bhati, PW-4, Rajender Kumar, Ahlmad, PW-5, Dr. N.M. Sharma, PW-6 and Dr. K.C. Singal, PW-7. The learned Magistrate, after recording the preliminary evidence in the complaint, came to the following conclusion vide orders dated 25.2.1992 :-

"In view of the above said authorities and being a prima facie case against them, the accused are summoned for the allegations of the commission of offences under section 307/34, Indian Penal Code, read with section 25/24/59 of Arms Act on filing of PF and copy of complaint."

5. Aggrieved by the said order, Surender Singh and Joginder Singh alias Jog, filed a revision before the learned Sessions Judge, Hisar, who vide impugned order dated 27.10.1997, accepted the revision and the reasons of acceptance of the revision as contained in paras 9 to 11, read as under :-

"9. The learned counsel the respondent-complainant has contended that the learned lower court while accepting the cancellation report, relied upon the judgment in Piara Singh v. State of Punjab, 1992(2