JUDGMENT :

Harpreet Singh Brar, J.

CRR-3060-2018 (O&M)

The instant revision petition has been preferred against the same impugned order dated 05.07.2018 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Exclusive Court for Heinous Crimes Against Women), Kurukshetra vide which the petitioner Kashmir Singh @ Bittu has been summoned to face trial as an additional accused under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. in the case arising out of FIR No. 288 dated 19.06.2016 registered under Sections 506, 120-B of IPC and Sections 10, 12 of POCSO Act at Police Station- Pehowa, Kurukshetra.

CRM-M-5165-2019

The aforementioned petition has been preferred under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for setting aside of the impugned order dated 05.07.2018 (Annexure P6) passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Exclusive Court for Heinous Crimes Against Women), Kurukshetra vide which petitioner no.1-Nishan Kaur @ Shani and petitioner no.2-Jagbir Singh have been summoned to face trial as additional accused under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. in the case arising out of FIR No. 288 dated 19.06.2016 registered under Sections 506, 120-B of IPC and Sections 10, 12 of POCSO Act at Police Station- Pehowa, Kurukshetra.

FACTUAL MATRIX

1. For the sake of brevity, facts are being extracted from CRR-3060-2018 as both of the above-mentioned petitions pertain to similar facts and circumstances and are challenging the same order dated 05.07.2018.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the FIR (supra) was registered upon a written complaint made by Sukhwinder Singh, wherein, it was alleged that Nishan Kaur @ Shani, Jagbir Singh and Kashmir Singh @ Bittu along with two other co-accused, undressed his minor daughter aged 11 years when she was alone at home on 15.06.2016. The said accused also touched her private parts and clicked her naked photographs and also recorded her obscene video. When the complainant came home, the accused, upon hearing the sound of his motorcycle, started to flee while threatening him and his family with death.

3. In consequence of the FIR (supra), the concerned police arrested co-accused Pardeep Singh @ Happy and Surjit Singh on 20.07.2016 and after completion of investigation, final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was presented against them. Qua the present petitioners, the pending investigation was completed and a supplementary challan was filed against Nishan Kaur @ Shani, Jagbir Singh and Kashmir Singh @ Bittu, wherein, it was recorded by the investigation agency that the aforesaid petitioners were found to be innocent and thereby, not charge-sheeted.

4. Charges against co-accused Surjit Singh were framed by the learned trial Court vide order dated 05.10.2016. Thereafter, statements of complainant PW1 and the victim PW2 were recorded. Then, an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. was moved by the complainant for summoning Nishan Kaur @ Shani, Jagbir Singh and Kashmir Singh @ Bittu as additional accused. The learned trial Court allowed the said application and vide the impugned order dated 05.07.2018, summoned petitioner- Nishan Kaur @ Shani for commission of offences under Sections 506/120B of IPC and Section 10, 12 of POCSO Act whereas, petitioners- Jagbir Singh and Kashmir Singh @ Bittu were summoned as additional accused for commission of offence punishable under Sections 506/120-B of IPC.

5. Aggrieved by the abovesaid order dated 05.07.2018, the petitioners namely Nishan Kaur @ Shani and Jagbir Singh have approached this Court by way of the petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. bearing number CRM-M-51652019, whereas, Kashmir Singh @ Bittu has approached this Court by way of the revision petition bearing number CRR-3060-2018.

CONTENTIONS

6. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner- Kashmir Singh @ Bittu in CRR-3060-2018 inter alia contends that no overt act has been attributed to as clear from a bare perusal of the FIR (supra) as well as the statement of prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. He further submits that the allegations levelled against the petitioner lack spec