****

SUBHAS MEHLA, J. (Oral)

1. The revisionists have come up before this Court by way of filing the present revision petition, against order dated 24.09.2025 passed in case bearing FIR No.398 dated 01.12.2020 under Sections 147, 149, 307 and 506 the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short – ‘the IPC’) registered at Police Station Ellenabad District Sirsa, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirsa whereby the revisionists have been summoned under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Code, 1973 (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’) to face trial along with other co-accused.

2. Briefly, the present case was registered on the statement of complainant, namely, Parminder Singh before the police on 01.12.2020 that he is working as driver with Randhir Singh Khosa. On 30.11.2020, on the directions of Randhir Singh, he had taken three persons to the plot of Veer Singh. He reached there at about 8:30 PM but he stood outside on the road. In the meantime, Gurbachan Singh, Surjeet Kaur (wife of Gurbachan) and Devinder Singh (son of Gurbachan) along with 02-03 other persons came there. Gurbachan Singh and Devinder Singh were carrying guns in their hands while Surjeet Kaur was carrying a gandasi in her hand and others were carrying lathi and dandas in their hands. Surjeet Kaur exhorted to kill the complainant party and on this, Devender Singh fired a gun shot, the pellets of which hit on his face and head as a result of which the complainant fell on the ground. Thereafter Gurbachan Singh exhorted and opened fire in the air but on hearing the same, a number of people started gathering at the spot; on seeing them all the assailants fled away from the spot along with their respective weapons.

3. Learned counsel for the revisionists submitted that the revisionists have been falsely implicated in the present case as during investigation, it was found by the police that the revisionists had no role to play in the commission of any offence as alleged in the FIR and as such, the revisionists were declared innocent by the police and kept in column No.2 of the final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. and offences under Sections 147 and 149 of the IPC were deleted while submitting the same. Subsequently, on the basis of statement of the complainant, the public prosecutor moved an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. for summoning the revisionists to stand trial along with other co-accused and the same has wrongly and illegally been allowed by the trial Court vide impugned order and revisionists have been summoned to face trial.

4. Learned counsel for the State submitted that earlier the revisionists were declared innocent and kept in column no.2 of final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C., however, later on vide impugned order dated 24.09.2025, the revisionists have been summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C. to face trial. On a query posed by this Court with regard to grounds on the basis of which the revisionists were declared innocent, learned State counsel drew the attention of this Court to impugned order dated 24.09.2026 whereby reasons for the same have been recorded by the Court concerned and the same is reproduced as under:

“ 11. Perusal of final report submitted by police reveals that accused Surjeet Kaur and Devender Singh were exonerated by the then DSP Ellenabad on the ground that the allegations against them were found to false but no specific observation has been given by the police in the final report as to what evidences were collected during investigation by the police to exonerate the aforenamed accused Surjeet Kaur and Devender Singh despite the fact that the complainant had specifically mentioned their names and roles to the police in his statement. Further on perusal of the final report, it is clear that vide MLR. No. DAJ/88/11/2020/EMB dated 30.11.2020 injured Paramjeet Singh had sustained three injuries and the concerned doctor reserved his opinion subject to receipt of x-ray report/ballistic forensic opinion. Hence from the above it is quite clear