Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral)

1. Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, Advocate, present for the applicants.

2. Mr. B.M. Pingal, learned brief holder, present for the State/respondent no1.

3. Mr. Ambrish Kumar with Mr. Bhuwan Bhatt, Advocates, for the respondent no.2.

4. The applicants in both the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. have filed these applications invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this Court against an order dated 14.06.2013, passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge IVth, Haridwar in Sessions Trial No.13 of 1997, by which the applicants have been summoned for facing trial.

5. The applicant in Criminal Misc. Case No.642 of 2013 is a Deputy Superintendent of Police who is presently posted in Bareilly, U.P. who at the relevant time was posted as Station Officer of Police Station Kankhal, and the applicants in Criminal Misc. Case No.649 of 2013 are Sub Inspectors. Applicant no.1 in Criminal Misc. Case No.649 of 2013 was posted as Head Moharrir and the applicant no. 2 was posted as Sub Inspector at Police Station Kankhal. In both the applications, the applicants have challenged an order dated 14.06.2013, passed by the learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Haridwar on an application moved by the prosecution under Section 319 of Cr.P.C., whereby the application has been allowed and the trial court came to the conclusion that the present applicants be prosecuted under Section 109 read with Section 302 of I.P.C. and alternatively under Section 120B read with Section 302 of I.P.C. It is this order which has been challenged before this Court by means of the present applications.

6. The brief facts of the case are that an F.I.R. under Case Crime No. 75 of 1996 was lodged on 01.06.1996, under Sections 147/148/149/302 of I.P.C. at Police Station Kankhal, District Haridwar, in respect of murder of one Pankaj Kumar Khanna @ Bugla. In the said crime, main accused was Rajesh Bhardwaj who was named in the F.I.R. Initially the investigation was conducted in the matter by these applicants, however, thereafter the matter was investigated by the CBCID. After investigation the charge sheet was filed and thereafter matter has been committed to the Court of Sessions and trial is presently proceedings, interalia, under Section 302 of I.P.C. in Sessions Trial No.13 of 1997 (State Vs. Bittu & others).

7. In the investigation, conducted by the CBCID, it was also found that certain role was also played by the present applicants in order to help the accused, as they deliberately wanted to connect the murder case with another crime, which happened on 25.05.1996, in order to divert the investigation. Hence, a separate Case being Case Crime No.62 of 1999 under Section 217/218/120B of I.P.C. was lodged at Police Station Kankhal against the applicants, in respect of which S.T. No.415 of 2008 is going on. During the trial of S.T. No.415 of 2008, it has come out in the Statement of PW1 Jitendra Kumar, that interpolation, correction, manipulation in the police record was made by the present applicants as a matter of “conspiracy” and in order to abate murder. The statement of PW1 Jitendra Kumar which is dated 09.05.2013 is on record, which has been perused. Although, this statement does not clearly find reflection in the order dated 14.06.2013, but the fact remains that the statement of PW1 Jitendra Kumar in which the role has been assigned to the present applicants clearly precedes the order dated 14.06.2013.

8. The powers given to the trial court under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. are absolutely wide. Section 319 of Cr.P.C. reads as under:-

319. Power to proceed against other persons appearing to be guilty of offence.

(1) Where, in the course of any inquiry into, or trial of, an offence, it appears from the evidence that any person not being the accused has committed any offence for which such person could be tried together with the accused, the Court may proceed against such person for the offence which he a