IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 01.9.2025 Davinder Kaur ......Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE KIRTI SINGH Present: Ms. Isha Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Guramrit Kaur, DAG, Punjab. Mr. Sukhandeep Singh, Advocate for respondents No. 2 to 4.

****

KIRTI SINGH , J. (ORAL)

1. The instant petition has been filed for setting aside the order dated 14.8.2025 (Annexure P-13) passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Amritsar, in case FIR No. 297 dated 17.12.2018, registered under Sections 406 and 498-A IPC, at Police Station Jandiala, District Amritsar, whereby an application preferred by the petitioner under Section 311 Cr.P.C.

to examine certain relevant witnesses, was dismissed.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia submits that in the present case, charges were framed on 13.12.2021. Thereafter on 6.4.2022, 20.5.2022 and 27.7.2022, the case was adjourned as only PW-6 was present but had not brought the relevant bills. However, from 31.8.2022 to 28.8.2024, the matter remained adjourned on account of pendency of a quashing petition bearing No. CRM-M-39280-2021 filed by respondents No. 2 and 3 before this Court, which was disposed of vide order dated 05.8.2024. Thereafter, an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. was preferred by the prosecution for summoning of respondent No. 3 and his son as additional accused, which was partly allowed by the learned trial Court on 11.11.2024, and respondent No. 3 was summoned as an additional accused. Subsequently, charges against respondent No. 3 were framed on 23.12.2024. It is further submitted that the matter was adjourned on a few dates as the learned Magistrate was on leave. Furthermore, given the fact that the matter could be compromised between the parties, the case stood adjourned from February 2025 till July 2025. It has also been submitted that on 23.7.2025, the petitioner and her father were examined. However, vide order dated 11.8.2025 (Annexure P-10), the evidence of the prosecution was closed by order. The petitioner preferred the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. seeking calling of the relevant witnesses on the ground that short opportunities were given to the prosecution to examine remaining witnesses and due to the said short adjournments and busy schedule of the police due to festival of Rakhar Punian at Baba Bakala, the rural police remained busy. However, vide impugned order dated 14.8.2025 (Annexure P-13), the said application has been dismissed. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the examination of the said witnesses is essential for the just and proper adjudication of the case. Therefore, it is submitted that the impugned order (Annexure P-13) be quashed and set aside and one last opportunity be granted to the complainant-petitioner to examine the witnesses as mentioned in the above application.

3. Per contra, learned counsel for respondents No. 2 to 4 opposes the present petition. He submits that the impugned order was

2025.09.04 10:09 passed after proper appreciation of the facts of the case.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with his able assistance.

5. Before considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, it would be apposite to extract Section 311 Cr.P.C., which is reproduced as below:-

"311. Power to summon material witness, or examine person present. Any Court may, at any stage of any inquiry, trial or other proceeding under this Code, summon any person as a witness, or examine any person in attendance, though not summoned as a witness, or. recall and re- examine any person already examined; and the Court shall summon and examine or recall and reexamine any such person if his evidence appears to it to be essential to the just decision of the case."

6. It is apparent from the above that the Court is vested with a broad and wholesome power to summon and examine or recall and re- exa