123 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Decided on : 23.01.2026 Raman Kumar ..... Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ Present: Mr. Yashjot Singh Dhaliwal, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Rajesh Bhardwaj, J.

1. Present revision petition has been filed impugning the order dated 19.11.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, SAG Nagar, whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Section 311 Cr.P.C.

has been dismissed.

2. As per the facts of the case, the petitioner-complainant registered FIR No.81, dated 22.04.2016, under Sections 302, 307, 325, 324, 323, 148, 149 and 201 IPC at Police Station Dera Bassi, SAS Nagar Mohali. The case is pending adjudication. During the course of trial, the petitioner filed three applications under Section 311 Cr.P.C., which were allowed by learned trial Court. Again application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner to examine the concerned doctors and to place on record the x-ray report etc. However, after hearing both the sides, learned trial Court dismissed the application vide impugned impugned rder dated 19.11.2025. Aggrieved by the same the petitioner is before this Court by way of filing the present revision petition.

3. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner before this Court is the complainant of the FIR. He submits that the petitioner filed the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for summoning and examining the witnesses concerned doctors alongwith X- ray report, diagnosis summary and the complete record of GMCH-32 and Civil Hospital, Mohali, of Mohinder Singh for period from 23.05.2016 to 15.06.2016. However, learned trial Court has illegally dismissed the same vide order dated 19.11.2025. It is submitted that the names of the concerned doctors were deliberately not added in the list of witnesses in the challan filed by the police only to make a weak case and in favour of the accused persons. He submits that the police did not annex the medical record of GMCH-32 and Civil Hospital, Phase-6, Mohali, of the deceased alongwith the challan and thus, to prove the chain of events regarding admission of the deceased from Dera Bassi and Civil Hospital, Phase-6, Mohali, is indispensable. He submits that as per the law settled, while exercising the power under Section 311 Cr.P.C., the Court has to find whether proposed evidence is necessary to be brought on record for the just and proper decision of the case or not. However, learned trial Court has dismissed the application in violation of law settled. He submits that no prejudice would be caused to the respondents and thus, the impugned order being unsustainable in the eyes of law, deserves to be set aside by allowing the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. He relies upon Jamatraj Kewaljit Govani vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1968 SC 178, Mohanlal Shamji Soni vs. Union of India and another, 1991(3) RCR (Criminal) 182, Iddar and others vs. Aabida and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 909 and Godrej Pacific Tech. Ltd. Vs. Computer Joint India Ltd., (SC) Criminal Appeal No.1181 of 2008.

3. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and perusing the record, it is deciphered that the petitioner is the author of the FIR. Petitioner-complainant filed fourth application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. which has been dismissed by learned trial vide order dated 19.11.2025. However, it is inferred from the record of the case that earlier three application filed by the petitioner under Section 311 Cr.P.C. on the similar ground that concerned doctors have not been mentioned in the list of the witnesses and their evidence is essential for just decision of the case, were allowed by learned trial Court and the petitioner was allowed to produce medical record into evidence. However, again the petitioner filed fourth application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. summoning and examining the witnesses concerned doctors along