The central legal point established in the judgment is the Trial Court's obligation to issue warrants/coercive process for witness appearance and the oversight of provisions under Section 311 Cr.PC.

JUDGMENT :

N.S. Shekhawat, J.

CRM-29601-2022

1. Prayer in the present application is for placing on record the copies of Aadhar Card, Passport and Death Certificate as Annexures R-2/A to R-2/C and further exempted from filing certified copies of the same.

2. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Annexures R-2/A to R-2/C are taken on record.

CRM-29602-2022

1. The present application has been moved by the applicant to implead the accused namely, Jagjit Singh Mann as respondent No.2.

2. Notice of the application to the non-applicant/petitioner.

3. Mr. Sachin Jain, Advocate, accepts notice on behalf of the non-applicant-petitioner and he has no objection in case, Jagjit Singh Mann, be impleaded as respondent No.2.

4. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed and the accused namely Jagjit Singh Mann is ordered to be impleaded as respondent No.2 in the memo of parties. The amended memo of parties is taken on record.

CRM-29603-2022

1. Learned counsel for the applicant does not want to press the present application.

2. Dismissed as not pressed.

Main case:

1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C with a prayer to quash the order dated 25.09.2018 (Annexure P-2) passed by the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, SBS Nagar, Mohali, whereby the evidence of the prosecution was ordered to be closed by the Court order.

2. In the present petition, the petitioner has also challenged the order dated 28.09.2018 (Annexure P-4), passed by the Trial Court, whereby the application under Section 311 Cr.PC was ordered to be dismissed.

3. As per the story of the prosecution, Sardar Mohinder Singh, husband of the petitioner had lodged one FIR No.7 dated 25.04.2014, under Sections 420,447,34 of IPC, Police Station NRI, SBS Nagar against Harjit Singh Parmar and Jagjit Singh Mann. The husband of the petitioner died on 02.04.2016 and thereafter, the petitioner was pursuing the proceedings before the Trial Court. The challan was presented against the accused and the trial formally commenced. During the trial proceedings, the case was listed on 25.09.2018 for prosecution evidence. As per the record, one of the remaining witness were summoned through the office of SSP and the summons were issued to some other witnesses. However, the process issued for summoning of witnesses through the office of SSP as well as the summons issued for summoning of other witnesses had been received unexecuted. On this, the Trial Court passed the following impugned order:-

“Statement of PW5 Wazir Kaur recorded. Despite grant of last opportunity for conclusion of prosecution evidence on second occasion and issuance of the process for summoning of remaining witnesses through the office of SSP and summons issued for summoning of other witnesses received back unexecuted. Hence, keeping in view of the nature of the offences alleged to be committed by the accused the period of which he has already faced trial before the Court. Remaining prosecution evidence is closed by order. Case stands adjourned to 28.09.2018 for recording the statement of accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

4. After passing of the abovesaid order, the petitioner/complainant also filed an application under Section 311 Cr.PC to examine Joginder Pal, Ex Sarpanch from Village Kamam as a witness on the ground that the said witness was earlier ill and was not able to depose properly, even though he had appeared before the Court. Consequently, he was given up on 24.08.2016. As per the complainant, the said witness could not be examined due to ill health and now he wanted to appear. However, vide the order Annexure P-4 the said application was also declined by the Trial Court by observing that the said witness himself did not intend to suffer any statement in the present case and consequently, the Trial Court did not find it justified to compel him to appear before the Court as a witness.

5. By way of the instant petiti