IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Arun Kumar Tyagi, J.
Gurmail Singh - Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab - Respondent
CRM-M-10851-2021
Decided On : 19-08-2021
Section 482 - Trial Conclusion - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Sections 148, 201, 307, 323, 324, 341, 342, 427, 506, 149, 364 - The judgment discusses the application of Section 482 of the Cr.P.C and the trial conclusion within three months. It also references various sections of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the implications of attaching supplementary Police Report/Challan with the main case for de novo joint trial.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C for directions to conclude the trial within three months. The trial involved multiple accused and supplementary Police Report/Challans were filed at different stages. The petitioner sought separate trial against other co-accused to avoid prejudice caused by attaching supplementary reports with the main case.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petition deserved to be allowed and set aside the order attaching supplementary reports with the main case. It directed the separate trial of the accused and concluded the trial within three months.
Issues: (i) Whether supplementary Police Report/Challan should be mandatorily attached with the main report; (ii) Whether the accused in both reports should be jointly tried; (iii) Whether de-novo trial is required to be conducted in such cases.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the fundamental right of the accused to a speedy trial and the discretion of the court to order joint or separate trials. It highlighted the need to avoid undue delay and prejudice to the accused, especially when already in custody.
Final Decision: The petition was allowed, and the order attaching supplementary reports with the main case was set aside. The court directed separate trials for the accused and concluded the trial within three months.
JUDGMENT
Arun Kumar Tyagi, J. - The case has been taken up for hearing through video conferencing.
1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'the Cr.P.C) for issuance of appropriate directions to the Trial Court to conclude the trial in a time bound manner preferably within three months in case FIR No. 75 dated 29.05.2018 registered under Sections 148, 201, 307, 323, 324, 341, 342, 427 and 506 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'the IPC) in Police Station Sadar Dhuri, District Sangrur to which Section 364 of the IPC was added later on.
2. The above-said FIR was registered on statement of complainant-Dharamjit Singh. In his statement Dharamjit Singh alleged that on 28.05.2018 at about 8:30 p.m. when he was going on his motorcycle and was being followed by his uncle Nihal Dass and younger brother Karamjit Singh on In nova Car, one Scorpio car driven by Jatinder Singh @ Goldi came from behind and hit his motorcycle. Gurmail Singh Ex-panch was sitting on the conductor seat and Saudagar Singh, Pirthi Singh and Jagjit Singh @ Jaggi were sitting on the rear seat of the Scorpio car. They came out of the car and Gurmail Singh raised lalkara to teach them a lesson for interfering in the land of their Dera. Gurmail Singh, armed with Kirpan gave a kirpan blow on his head with intention to kill him which hit him in the middle of the head. Sudagar Singh, armed with iron rod, gave rod blow on his left leg. Prithi Singh, armed with baseball bat, gave blow of baseball bat near his right knee. Jagjit Singh @ Jaggi and Jatinder Singh @ Goldi, armed with dangs, gave dang blows on his right leg. When his uncle Nihal Dass and brother Karamjit Singh came and tried to rescue him, the accused took the complainant to the house of Gurmail Singh in their Scorpio car where his blood stained clothes were washed and he was also given bath. The accused also made his video and threatened him that he should say that he had come to the house of Gele otherwise they would kill him by setting him on fire. The complainant managed to escape from there. Thereafter, his uncle Nihal Dass got him admitted in Civil Hospital, Dhuri.
3. Pursuant to registration of the FIR, the police investigated the case. Accused-Gurmail Singh (the petitioner) and Jagjit Singh were arrested on 15.06.2018 and 22.08.2018 respectively and Police Report/Challan was presented against them on 10.09.2018. Accused-Sudagar Singh was arrested on 22.09.2018 and supplementary Police Report/Challan was presented against him on 03.11.2018. In the course of trial against them the prosecution evidence was concluded and after recording statements of the accused under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C, the case was adjourned for defence evidence. While the case was fixed for defence evidence, accused-Prithi Singh and Jatinder Singh @ Goldi joined the investigation in compliance with orders dated 17.10.2018 and 01.01.2019 respectively. On completion of investigation, supplementary Police Report/Challan was presented against Prithi Singh and Jatinder Singh @ Goldi on 12.03.2020 and thereupon case was committed to the Court of Session on 12.02.2021. Vide order dated 25.02.2021 learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur attached supplementary Police Report/Challan filed against accused Prithi Singh @ Pritpal and Jatinder Singh @ Goldi with the main case and adjourned the same to 16.04.2021 for hearing on charge. Case was thereafter adjourned to various dates last of such dates being 09.08.2021 for hearing on charge.
4. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner has filed the present petition for issuance of directions to learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur to conclude the trial within three months.
5. The petition has been opposed by the respondent-State and the complainant.
6. Status report by way of affidavit of Sh. Paramjit Singh, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub-Division Dhuri, District Sangrur has been filed o
A.R Antulay vs. RS. Nayak : AIR 1988 SC 1531
Bhagwan vs. Delhi Admn. : (1975) 1 SCC 866
Brichh Bhuian vs. State of Bihar : AIR 1963 SC 1120)
Lalu Prasad @ Lalu Prasad Yadav vs. State through C.B.I. (A.H.D.) Ranchi
Munnalal and others vs. State of M.P. : 2006 (1) RCR(Cri) 418
Munnalal and others vs. State of M.P. : 2006 (1) RCR(Cri) 418
Munnalal and others vs. State of M.P. : 2006 (1) RCR(Cri) 418
Narcotic Control Bureau vs. Harnath : 1995 Cr.LJ. 2770
Shashikant Singh vs. Tarkeshwar Singh : 2002 (3) RCR(Cri) 191
Shashikant Singh vs. Tarkeshwar Singh : 2002 (3) RCR(Cri) 191
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.