Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(P&H) 868

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Deepak Gupta, J.
Manjinder Singh - Petitioner - Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab - Respondent - Respondent
CRM-M-6152 of 2023
Decided On : 17-11-2023

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Pranav Handa, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. M.S. Nagra, AAG, Punjab.

The power under Section 319 CrPC is discretionary and extraordinary, to be exercised sparingly and only when strong and cogent evidence occurs against a person. The degree of satisfaction for invoking power under Section 319 of the Code is much higher than a prima facie case.

Headnote:
Section 319 CrPC - Summoning of Additional Accused - 302/201/34 IPC - The court discussed the legal provisions of Section 319 CrPC and the scope of the court's power to arraign any person as an accused during the course of inquiry or trial. The court emphasized that the power under Section 319 CrPC is discretionary and extraordinary, to be exercised sparingly and only when strong and cogent evidence occurs against a person. The court referred to precedents to establish that the degree of satisfaction for invoking power under Section 319 of the Code is much higher than a prima facie case. The court concluded that there was no evidence against the petitioner to summon him as an additional accused, setting aside the impugned order.
Fact of the Case:

The case involved the quashing of an order summoning the petitioner as an additional accused in a case related to the murder of Ramchand Chhabra. The complainant alleged that the petitioner, a police officer, was involved in the murder.
Finding of the Court:

The court found that there was no evidence against the petitioner to summon him as an additional accused, as the complainant was not an eyewitness and there was no other evidence implicating the petitioner in the murder.
Issues: The main issue was the validity of the order summoning the petitioner as an additional accused based on the complainant's allegations.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the discretionary and extraordinary nature of the power under Section 319 CrPC, requiring strong and cogent evidence against a person to exercise such power. The court concluded that there was no evidence against the petitioner to justify summoning him as an additional accused.
Final Decision: The impugned order summoning the petitioner as an additional accused was set aside, and the petition was allowed. The second petition seeking anticipatory bail was rendered infructuous and stood disposed of.

DEEPAK GUPTA, J.

This order shall dispose of two petitions as referred above as both of them have arisen out of the proceedings of same FIR.

2. In CRM-M-4532-2023, petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 15.12.2022 (Annexure P1) passed by ld. Additional Sessions Judge, Jalandhar, whereby he has been summoned under Section 319 CrPC to face trial as an additional accused in Sessions case No.SC/49/2019 arising out of FIR No.32 dated 06.10.2018, registered at Police Station Patara, District Jalandhar Rural, under Sections 302/201/34 IPC.

3. In CRM-M-6152-2023, petitioner has prayed for grant of anticipatory bail, after being summoned under Section 319 CrPC to face trial, in the aforesaid case.

4. FIR was lodged on the statement of Kuldeep Chhabra (respondent No.2 in CRM-M-4532-2023), as per which he and his paternal uncle Ramchand Chhabra (deceased) had lent money to some people. On 04.10.2018, his uncle told him that he was going to collect money from people and left home at about 11 O’clock on his Activa No.PB-08-DH-3465. He did not return home till evening. Mobile No.75080-35760 of his uncle Ramchand Chhabra was coming switched off. Complainant along with his nephew Sanjay Kumar went to the Police Station and lodged the missing report. It was further stated by the complainant that his uncle told him on number of occasions that he had lent some money to Ranjit Kaur w/o late Gurjeet Singh r/o village Johla, who was putting off the matter on one pretext or the other, whenever money was demanded from her and she had even given death threats. In search of his uncle, complainant and his nephew reached Gurudwara Sahib of Village Johla, where they noticed Activa of his uncle standing in the street and on enquiry, came to know that house of Ranjit Kaur was nearby the place, where they had found activa. Main gate of the house was locked from outside. Upon further enquiry, it transpired that Activa was standing there since 04.10.2018 evening. Complainant further told that his uncle had told him that whenever he used to ask money from Ranjit Kaur, she used to threaten that she will kill him with the help of his friend Manjinder Singh (petitioner in both the petitions), posted in police and therefore, he was sure that his uncle Ramchand Chhabra had been killed by Ranjit Kaur with the help of her lover Manjinder Singh.

5. After registration of the FIR, investigation was carried out. Ranjit Kaur was arrested on 06.10.2018. During the course of investigation, she suffered disclosure statement that on 04.10.2018, Ramchand Chhabra (deceased) had come to her house, with whom she had illicit relations. Her son Harjap Singh caught them doing wrong act. Harjap Singh attacked Ramchand Chhabra with an iron angle on the back of his head, due to which he suffered injuries and died on the spot. Ranjit Kaur told further that she along with Harjap Singh got scared and took the body of Ramchand Chhabra to second floor, where they broke a wooden stool and covered the dead body with some cloths and burnt the dead body on an iron cot. Partially burnt dead body was hidden on the roof under stones. Ranjit Kaur disclosed further that murder of Ramchand Chhabra had been committed by her in connivance with her son Harjap Singh and no other individual was involved in the commission of the said crime and that name of Manjinder Singh had been wrongly implicated in the FIR because he was neither present at the time of commission of murder nor came to her house before or after the incident.

6. In view of the above said disclosure statement of Ranjit Kaur, her son Harjap Singh was arrayed as accused and arrested on 07.10.2018. He also suffered disclosure statement on the similar lines as that of Ranjit Kaur. Dead body of Ramchand Chhabra was recovered at their instance and postmortem was got conducted. After thorough investigation, Manjinder Singh (petitioner in both the petitions) was found innocent. After concluding investigation, final report was submitted in