LAWS(DLH)-2012-4-369

INDER SINGH BIST Vs. STATE

Decided On April 27, 2012
Inder Singh Bist Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petitions lay a challenge to the impugned orders passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Delhi, whereby the petitioners were charged for having committed the offences punishable under Sections 302/307/34 IPC.

(2.) The facts of the case which are common to both the petitions, as set out in the impugned order dated 12.12.2002 are as under:-

(3.) On behalf of petitioners, it has been submitted that both the co-accused persons namely N.P.Singh and O.P.Chaudhary have been acquitted by the learned Trial Court for the reason that none of the prosecution witnesses to the occurrence as well as the complainant, who is the wife of the injured Ram Singh, supported the case of prosecution resulting in acquittal of the two accused persons facing trial at that time. The evidence to be produced by the prosecution in case these two accused are also made to face trial, would remain the same and ultimately the case will result in acquittal of these petitioners also which will be at the cost of wastage of precious time of the Court. It has been submitted that once the witnesses have been examined by the Court during the trial against co-accused, charge cannot be framed merely on the basis of complaint and statement of witnesses recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., but the statements of witnesses made during trial. If the statements made during trial by the prosecution witnesses are considered the case is to ultimately result in acquittal and in these circumstances it is necessary that the order framing charge be quashed. It has also been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that in both the impugned orders, the learned ASJ specifically mentioned that the inherent powers to quash the charge are vested only in High Court and due to this handicap proceedings against the petitioners could not be quashed by the learned ASJ.