IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH

Crl. R. No.86 of 2012

Date of Decision:12.1.2012

Satpal

.... Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana

.... Respondent

CORAM: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur

Present:

Mr. Sanjiv Sheoran, Advocate for the petitioner.

****

1.Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to

see the judgment?

2.To be referred to the Reporters or not?

3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

NIRMALJIT KAUR, J.(Oral)

The petitioner and his father were found innocent. They were

kept in column No.2 while Ashok Kumar was challaned by the police and

he was charge sheeted by the learned trial Court under Section 302 IPC read

with Section 25 of the Arms Act vide order dated 29.8.2006. An application

under Section 319 Cr.P.C. to summon the petitioner and his father as an

accused moved by the complainant was dismissed by the learned Sessions

Judge vide order dated 19.10.2006. Aggrieved against the said order, State

of Haryana as well as complainant filed a Criminal Revision petition before

the High Court. The High Court allowed Crl. R. No.2538 of 2006 vide

order dated 2.5.2008 and directed to summon the petitioner as an accused.

The petitioner filed Special Leave to Appeal before the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court stayed the operation of the order dated 2.5.2008 passed

by the High Court. Meanwhile, the learned Sessions Judge, vide judgment

dated 22.5.2009 convicted the brother of the petitioner Ashok Kumar under

Section 304 Part I of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25 of the Arms Act.

Crl. R. No.86 of 2012

-2-

The appeal against the order dated 22.5.2009 passed the learned Sessions

Judge is pending before the High Court. However, the revision filed by the

State as well as the complainant against the judgment dated 22.5.2009

passed by learned Sessions Judge, convicting the brother of the petitioner

Ashok Kumar under Section 304 Part I of the Indian Penal Code and

Section 25 of the Arms Act the conviction was dismissed.

Meanwhile, the Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed the SLP

No.4475 of 2008 against the order dated 2.5.2008 passed by the High Court

vide order dated 3.12.2010. In view of the order passed by the Hon'ble

Supreme Court, learned Sessions Judge summoned the petitioner as an

accused in case FIR No.101 dated 23.4.2006.

Thereafter, the petitioner appeared before the trial Court and

the learned Sessions Judge framed the charge under Section 302 read with

Section 34 IPC vide order dated 7.12.2011

The present petition has been filed against the order dated

7.12.2011 framing the charges under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC

on the ground that co-accused of the petitioner was convicted under Section

304 Part I of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25 of the Arms Act and the

revision petition field by the complainant as well as the State against the

said conviction has already been dismissed.

The argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that

when the main accused has been convicted under Section 304 Part I of the

Indian Penal Code and Section 25 of the Arms Act, how the charges against

the petitioner can be framed under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC.

Heard.

It is not disputed that co-accused of the petitioner namely

Crl. R. No.86 of 2012

-3-

Ashok Kumar, who is brother of the present petitioner was charged 302

IPC. However, on the basis of evidence before the Court, the trial Court

convicted the co-accused under Section 304 Part I of the Indian Penal Code

and Section 25 of the Arms Act. The appeal against the said order is

pending before the High Court.

It is also an admitted position that the High Court vide order

dated allowed Crl. R. No.2538 of 2006 and directed to summon the

petitioner as an accused. The SLP filed against the said order was dismissed

by the Supreme Court vide order dated 3.12.2010. Thus, no fault can be

found with the order dated 7.12.2011 framing the charges under Section 302

read with