*****

VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral)

The present revision petition has been preferred against the order dated 29.09.2014 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Batala whereby the criminal complaint titled as Santosh Kaur Vs. Manjit Singh and others under Sections 302, 148, 149 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 27, 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 had been dismissed.

2. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that the petitioner’s son Gurpreet Singh @ Gopi was a victim of honour killing at the hands of the respondent–accused persons, namely Manjit Singh, Jaspal Singh, Rajinder Singh @ Balla, Balwinder Kaur and Sandeep Kaur for the reasons that Gurpreet Singh @ Gopi had solemnised a run-away marriage with Jatinder Kaur, daughter of accused Jaspal Singh, which was vehemently opposed by her family members. On account of stiff opposition, the said couple apprehended danger to their lives and liberty at the hands of the respondent–accused persons and had, therefore, approached this Court by filing CRM-M-16692 of 2008 for seeking protection. The said petition was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 08.07.2008, whereby respondents No. 2 and 3 therein were directed to look into the grievance of the petitioners therein and to take appropriate steps to ensure protection of their life and liberty, in accordance with law.

3. It is further submitted that notwithstanding the aforesaid order directing measures to be taken for ensuring protection, on 11.08.2009 at about 09:15 AM, when Dharm Singh (relative of the complainant) alongwith Gurpreet Singh @ Gopi (since deceased) were going to village Shahbupara at the time when they reached near G.T. road between Amtrisar and Batala, a vehicle stopped in front of them. Accused-Manjit Singh (uncle of Jatinder Kaur), Jaspal Singh (father of Jatinder Kaur), Rajinder Singh @ Balla (uncle of Jatinder Kaur), Balwinder Kaur (aunt of Jatinder Kaur) and Sandeep Kaur alongwith two other unidentified persons alighted from the said vehicle. Jaspal Singh and Manjit Singh were armed with rifles. Upon arrival, Balwinder Kaur and Sandeep Kaur raised exhortations, whereupon Gurpreet Singh @ Gopi attempted to flee towards village ‘Said Mubarak’. It is alleged that accused Manjit Singh and Jaspal Singh chased him in the vehicle and opened fire, as a result of which Gurpreet Singh @ Gopi sustained gunshot injuries on his hand and head. Dharm Singh raised an alarm, whereupon the complainant, who was present outside her house along with her daughter, rushed towards the spot. It is alleged that upon reaching the spot, Gurpreet Singh @ Gopi was found lying dead. It was further alleged that accused Rajinder Singh @ Balla came out of the vehicle and inflicted kick blows upon the deceased. The complainant attributed the occurrence to an act of honour killing, committed by the respondent–accused persons, in retaliation for the marriage solemnised between Gurpreet Singh @ Gopi and Jatinder Kaur.

4. On receipt of the said information, the police registered a case FIR No.80 dated 11.08.2009 under Sections 302, 148, 149, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act, 1959.

5. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner complainant contends that the investigation in the above case was not conducted fairly and properly and as a result of the biased investigation Rajinder Singh @ Balla, Balwinder Kaur and Sandeep Kaur were placed in column No.II of the said report filed under Section 173 Cr.P.C. and the charge-sheet was filed only against Manjit Singh and Jaspal Singh i.e. uncle and father of Jatinder Kaur. Learned Senior Counsel submits that such a selective approach in the investigation, in the face of clear allegations and material on record, reflects a biased and incomplete investigation, which resulted in miscarriage of justice.

6. Counsel further submits that it is further a matter of record that charges were framed against Ma