CRR No.3063 of 2017 (O&M)

1

204

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH

CRR No.3063 of 2017 (O&M)

Date of decision: May 18, 2018

Shiv Lal @ Sholly

.....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab

.....Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.B. CHAUDHARI

Present:

Mr. Vinod Ghai, Senior Advocate with

Mr. J.S. Mehndiratta, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. H.S. Sullar, DAG Punjab.

Mr. S.P.S. Tinna, Advocate for the complainant.

****

A.B. CHAUDHARI,

J (Oral)

By the present revision petition, the petitioner-original

accused-Shiv Lal @ Sholly has put to challenge the revisional order

dated 02.08.2017, in Sessions Trial No.SC/32/2016 passed by the Ist

Additional Sessions Judge, Fazilka, in FIR No.120 dated 12.12.2015,

under Sections 302, 307, 326, 148, 149, 120-B/115/201 of Indian

Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC'), Section 3(2) V of Scheduled Caste

and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, registered at

Police Station Bahav Wala, by which the learned trial Court exercising

the power under Section 311 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for

short ‘Cr. P.C.’) allowed the prayer made by Kaushalaya Devi for

examination of Akash son of Rajinder Kumar.

FACTS

The incident in FIR No.120 dated 12.12.2015 relates to the

Mahavir Singh

2018.05.25 14:20

I attest to the accuracy and

authenticity of this document

Chandigarh

CRR No.3063 of 2017 (O&M)

2

murder of Bhim Tank and injuries to Gurjant Singh as reported by

Ranjit Singh, the complainant, brother of Gurjant Singh, to the police.

In the FIR that was registered, the name of the petitioner-Shiv Lal @

Sholly was not at all indicated. But in the supplementary statement that

was recorded on the same day, namely 12.12.2015 of complainant-

Ranjit Singh, Shiv Lal @ Sholly was named as a conspirator. On

17.12.2015, police recorded the statement of Gurjant Singh.

Thereafter, on 21.12.2015, statement of Akash son of Madan Lal was

recorded, who also stated of alleged conspiracy by the petitioner. On

the same day, the statement of Kaushalaya Devi, mother of the

deceased was recorded who also stated about conspiracy. On

29.02.2016, polygraph test was conducted and thereafter, the petitioner

was declared innocent. The police completed the investigation and

filed a final report in the form of challan, on 12.03.2016, in which the

petitioner-Shiv Lal @ Sholly was not named as an accused. After the

commencement of the trial, the evidence of Sunil Kumar, the brother

of the deceased was recorded, on 15.03.2016, in which he stated that

he had heard about the conspiracy made by the petitioner. On

17.04.2016, police filed supplementary challan against the petitioner-

Shiv Lal @ Sholly. Thereafter, on 03.08.2016, the trial Court framed

the charge against the accused persons and the evidence began, on

01.09.2016.

The controversy qua the impugned order is regarding

summoning of the person Akash son of Rajinder Kumar as a witness

Mahavir Singh

2018.05.25 14:20

I attest to the accuracy and

authenticity of this document

Chandigarh

CRR No.3063 of 2017 (O&M)

3

under Section 311 Cr. P.C., in the trial filed by Kaushalaya Devi

appended by public prosecutor. In the status report that was filed on

07.04.2017, again, there was no disclosure about the name of the

witness Akash son of Rajinder Kumar. Thereafter, on 12.01.2017,

evidence of Kaushalaya Devi was recorded who also did not say a

word about Akash son of Rajinder Kumar as a witness. However, on

04.03.2017, Kaushalaya Devi came alongwith an application under

Section 311 Cr. P.C. enclosing a photocopy of statement under Section

161 Cr. P.C. of Akash son of Rajinder Kumar, praying for order under

Section 311 Cr. P.C. The application was endorsed by the public

prosecutor. The evidence of PW9-Harjeet Singh, SSP, who was the

Investigating Officer who had recorded the statements of witnesses

was also recorded, but in his cross-examination, he admitted that there

was no statement of Akash s